How to define urban park relevance? Examining and integrating US National Park Service and partner views on the goal of "relevance to all Americans"

• Published in: Journal of environmental planning and management Vol. 68; no. 8; pp. 1950 - 1968
• Main Authors: Perry, Elizabeth E., Jewiss, Jennifer, Manning, Robert E., Ginger, Clare
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Routledge 03.07.2025
• Subjects: administrative management; collaboration; Collective Impact; evaluation; parks; relevance; U.S. National Park Service; urban parks
• ISSN: 0964-0568; 1360-0559; 1360-0559
• DOI: 10.1080/09640568.2024.2303635

Park agencies must consider their engagement strategies' relevance. Urban and local relevance are enduring foci. Agencies thus collaborate with partners serving urban, local audiences to bridge the park-community boundary. Yet, relevance is relative. How, then, can views on park relevance from an agency and its partners be reconciled for a collaborative view of parks' cityscape contributions? We examined this conundrum within the Urban Agenda of the US National Park Service (NPS), which highlighted the agency's substantial urban presence, acknowledged urban populations as critical stewards, and sought meaningful related partnerships. Framed with Collective Impact components, we sought to learn from 63 interviews with NPS staff and partners in Detroit, Tucson, and Boston about what "relevance to all Americans" entails. We found distinct differences between the views but that the agency-specific view can contribute to cityscape-wide goals. Detailing these definitions and alignments allows for strategic, scaled planning of related actions.