Applying the Theory of Access to understand access to camping on public lands: A complement to leisure constraints theory

Access to front-country camping on North American public lands has historically been preferential to those who are White, relatively wealthy, and highly educated. In theory, however, all activities on public lands are available to all people, and everyone has equal right to enjoy the benefits from recreational activities like camping in these spaces. Since the 1960s, research on access has focused on the barriers, or constraints, that influence overall participation in leisure activities. Few studies, however, have examined access to front-country camping. As a complement to leisure constraints theory, this study used Ribot and Peluso’s (2003) theory of access as a guide to examine constraints to front-country camping in the American West. Access theory focuses on the “ability” rather than the “right” to benefit, and this theory suggests there are several mechanisms of access that mediate how people directly or indirectly benefit from things like outdoor recreation. This study examined how six access mechanisms—Time, Technology, Capital, Social Identity, Social Relations, Rights-based Access, and Knowledge—mediate access to front-country camping on public lands. Data were collected in an on-site survey of campers at Curecanti National Recreation Area in Gunnison, Colorado during summer 2024. Access mechanisms were measured across 29 variables that were adapted from previous leisure constraints research. Sociodemographic variables were also measured. Data were analyzed to answer the following research questions: (1) Which mechanisms of access are most likely to be constrained among front-country campers? (2) Do the mechanisms of access vary between first-come, first-served campsites and advanced reservation-based campsites? By identifying key constraints to camping access, this research helps public land managers understand how different management practices—such as advanced reservation systems—may limit access to recreation opportunities for certain groups. The findings can guide future policies aimed at promoting more inclusive and equitable recreation on public lands.