Chapter 3

Activity Levels

Data from Sport England’s latest Active Lives Report (November 20-21) shows that 61.4% of adults in England were classed as active, 11.5% were classed as inactive, and 27.2% were classed as inactive. These scores remained somewhat stable over a 5-year period, although there appeared to be a drop in the overall population of active people in 2020 and 2021, likely corresponding with the COVID-19 lockdowns. Month-on-month data appears to confirm this, with activity picking up as restrictions eased.

In terms of types of activity, there are several interesting trends observed over the period studied.

• By far, the biggest uptick was in “walking for leisure” which saw 2.4 million more people engaging with it over the period studied compared to the previous year (a 10% increase), and a 5.7 million uptick compared to five years ago (a 24% increase).
  
  
• By comparison, there was a sharp drop noted in Active Travel and Fitness Activities in 2020 and 2021 – likely because of the pandemic. Less drastic, but equally noted was a drop in participation in swimming and team sports over the same time.
  
  
• Running and cycling for leisure appeared to experience a slight increase in popularity in 2020 before dropping off in 2021 – which is also an observation shared by participants in this research project.
  
  
• Fitness activities appear to be recovering to their pre-pandemic levels at a slower rate than team sports, for example, with the latter having returned to their pre-pandemic levels and the former still not fully caught up.

Opportunities for Lincolnshire-wide innovation

• Digital rollout: Over the course of the interviews, many participants noted that the first year of the pandemic saw the successful rollout of an unprecedented number of digital tools to help people engage with the sport, physical activity, and leisure sector. Examples included virtual and e-sport initiatives, but also the digitisation of services in leisure centres and gyms.
  
  
• “Atypical” active leisure: Participants in the interviews talked about the ways in which low-impact, low-stakes activities had powerful impacts on their clients, their clients’ with their bodies, and their clients’ outlook on exercise altogether. Many participants expressed the view that low-stakes activities, including atypical active leisure, would make a great springboard for future, more intensive engagement with the sport and physical activity sector.
  
  
• Using sport, physical activity, and leisure as part of a wider health strategy: Alongside “atypical” sport and physical activities, the interview data showed a rise in activities that are supportive of sport and physical activities, such as chiropractic, acupuncture, body conditioning activities, and more. Furthermore, participants also spoke of their desire to work in closer collaboration with healthcare providers, to engage in dialogue and co-production.
  
  
• Early provision: Participants reflected on how important early engagement was for the sport, physical activity, and leisure sector. Many participants worked with children and teenagers, as well as their parents, to support them in accessing appropriate physical activity, and thus had a lot of observations they wanted to share about the value of sport, physical activity, and active leisure for the family as a whole.
  
  
• Activities outside of leisure centres: Some of the most impactful, influential events that could increase physical activity levels were the ones that happened on people’s doorstep. Community centres and village halls offer a cost-effective way for residents to engage in sport and physical activity. These spaces are very well-placed for supporting families, elderly-residents, and under-served communities, for both leisure and volunteering, and can be vastly more budget-friendly than larger leisure centres.

Challenges for provision

• Confidence and self-efficacy: The biggest barriers towards engagement with the sector were self-efficacy, motivation, and confidence on the part of individuals. Interview participants noted that many of the interventions needed to help citizens with their confidence, mental health, and self-efficacy are expensive, and resources are limited. Equally, participants acknowledged the importance of habit-building and enjoyment for the success of any intervention. Lastly, participants also discussed the importance of a joined-up approach in helping citizens achieve their goals.
  
  
• Lack of coordination: One of the main concerns raised by participants in this research project was the lack of coordination between providers of sport, physical activity, and leisure activities, and commissioners from the local authorities. Given the size of the county, and the number of micro companies in the sector, it is worth asking to what extent coordination and cooperation is possible; nevertheless, one of the concerns that the participants expressed was that there was simply not enough information about what was available, for whom, and how different people could access it.
  
  
• Insufficient funding: After confidence, motivation, and self-efficacy were accounted for, cost and accessibility were the next most common deterrents for individuals to engage in the sector. The issue of cost is expected to persist and increase in severity, as household budgets become more and more constrained However, cost is also a challenge that providers cited a lot when asked about the biggest current barriers to them delivering new services.
  
  
• Lack of accessibility: Over 50% of respondents of the survey somewhat agree and 19.2% strongly agree that people do not engage in sport and leisure activities because of cost, while 11.5% strongly agree and 65.4% somewhat agree that people do not engage in sport or leisure activities because of time. 15.4% strongly agree and 53.8% somewhat agree that people do not engage in sport or leisure activities because of the distance they have to travel. That is not to say that people are not willing to go the distance and cost in order to engage in sport and physical activity –participants were of the opinion that, given sufficient motivation, people would travel in order to engage in sport and physical activity.
  
  
• Gaps in provision for defined groups: As seen from Chapter 2, there are several groups in Greater Lincolnshire and Rutland for whom engagement with sport, physical activity, and leisure presents higher barriers than for others – older people, ethnic minorities, people with disabilities and long-term conditions, and people living in non-affluent areas. However, what might work for one group might not work for another, which is why the report recommends consultation and community engagement as the first step on providing support for specific ethnic or religious groups, people living with mental health difficulties, LGBQIA+ people, and people living with multiple and complex needs.

Chapter Three, Recommendations

As demonstrated by this chapter, there are significant opportunities for developing provision in Greater Lincolnshire and Rutland. However, there are multiple individual, organisational, and structural challenges that may prevent citizens from engaging with the sector. As such, the recommendations that are put forward are aimed at addressing these challenges:

- Interventions aimed at increasing the confidence and self-efficacy of citizens. Examples include:

• Targeted activities, based on consultations with various user groups (see chapter 2 for more details.)
• Activities for ethnic minorities.
• Activities for people with mental health difficulties.
• Activities for people with disabilities.
• Resources, training, and support for providers to better engage with people with multiple and complex needs.
• As there was little or no data on the experiences and needs of non-binary and transgender people, there is a need for more research and direct engagement with LGBTQIA+ individuals to support them to engage with the sector.
  
  

- Interventions to address the lack of accessibility to sport, physical activity, and leisure in certain parts of the county. Examples include:

• More funding for taking activities “on the road” or to local community centres.
• More funding for local trainers.
• More training and support for local providers.
• Investment in increasing both the accessibility of venues and the accessibility of programs.
  
  

- Interventions to address the lack of coordination between stakeholders within the sector. Examples include:

• Better networking for all organisations with the sector.
• Direct engagement with small providers, CICs, and charities that operate in the sector.
• More targeted aid for small providers.
• Better conversations between public sector (NHS, councils, GLLEP) and small providers, particularly the third sector.
  
  

- Increasing access to funding, both in terms of direct grants and in terms of information and aid to help providers access funding. Examples include:

• Better signposting for funding calls.
• Better information and support to help small providers apply for funding.
  
  

- Building partnerships between small providers, charities, and CICs, and the public sector (NHS, councils, the GLLEP) to create continuity of funding.

(See chapter 1 for more recommendations)

- Interventions aimed at increasing provision for specific demographic groups

(see chapter 2 for more details)

- Raising the profile of “atypical” active leisure and showcasing the good work done by providers within that part of the sector

- Increasing early provision, both directly (through targeted programs) and indirectly (through measures that will increase access to these programs)

- Use data alongside local skills and knowledge to improve service delivery and increase access to programs.

The above list is advisory and non-exhaustive.