AsituatedethosofplayworkTurningtheplayworkstoryintoanarrativeforchangeAdrianVoceandGordonSturrockJune2018AbstractPlaywork is a distinct approach to working with children, and a particular set ofperspectives on the nature of children’s play in a broader context. We concur withothers (e.g. Brown, 2017) that its theory and practice – on play and development,constructsofchildhood,theroleofadultswithchildren,theallocationanduseofspace,andchildren’srights–areuniqueamongthechildren’sprofessions.This paper attempts to describe someof these perspectives, the practice tenets thatarisefromthem,andthedistinctethoswesuggesttheycomprise.Wethenproposeabroad rationale for playwork advocacy, congruent with this ethos and its politicaldimension.Wealsoattempttosetoutalong-termvisionfortheplaceofplayworkpracticewithinarenewed, reimagined public realm; andwe suggest some specific shorter-term,moretangible objectives, towards the aim of formulating a sustained government policyframeworkthatrecognisesandsupportsplayworkwithoutcompromisingit:achievablemilestonesonaroadmaptothelonger-termvision.Through a critical appraisal of the field’s recent history, the paper considers howorganisational structures for playwork advocacy and professional development have,until now, with the odd exception, been ultimately run not by practitioners but byvariousbranchesofgovernment, itsagents,employerbodiesorestablishedchildren’scharities – generally more aligned with the current hegemony than with anythingapproximatingtotheplayworkethos.Wearguethat,intheabsenceofacohesiveandauthoritativeplaywork representativebody, thishas led tonear fatal compromises inthedevelopmentanddisseminationoftheplayworkapproach.The paper addresses the perennial conundrum of a community of practice thatprofoundlychallengesthestatusquo;yetwhich,nevertheless,needstofindsufficientleverageinthemainstreampolicydiscoursetosecuretheresourcesitneedstosustainitswork.AstheprofessionalplayworkfraternityattemptstoregroupaftereightyearsofausterityandUKgovernmentpolicyreversals,wesuggestthereisanurgentneedfor

2

the field to coalesce around a binding narrative – accommodating the plurality ofperspectivesandapproaches thathaveevolved– toexplicitlyarticulate itsethos inaway that can both speak to a wide public audience and impact on the policymakingprocess.Thepaperconcludesthattheframeworkforthisnarrativeshouldbechildren’srights,refracted through the prism of the playwork ethos, which is a bulwark againstinstrumentalist agendas. We suggest that the playwork field, though greatlyincapacitated by the dismantling of its infrastructure and the closure of many of itsservicesandcourses,hasalegitimateclaimtobethepracticecommunitybestqualifiedto interpret General Comment 17 of theUNCRC (CRC, 2013) for theUK context.Weproposethatfullyengagingwiththerightsdiscourseisthelogicalstrategyforplayworkadvocates; aligning our ethos to an authoritative, coherent policy case that alsoresonateswithawiderpoliticalnarrativeofsocialandspatial justice,universalhumanrightsandfullcitizenshipforall.

3

Authors’notes1. Throughout the text, the first person plural (‘we, our, us’) is used: sometimes tosignify theauthors,moreoften to signify theplayworkcommunityofwhichweareapart.Wehopeitisclearwhichiswhich.Withregardtothelatter,althoughneitherofushas practised face-to-face playwork for some time we each have many years’experience intheroleandhave, inourdifferentways,continuedtoadvocateforplayfromaplayworkperspective.Whereweusethefirstpersonpluraltodescribecollectivepositionsandassertionsbythefield,theseare,ofcourse,onlyourinterpretation,fromourperspective.Thisisourcontributiontoadiscourse:itisnotdefinitiveandwedonotclaimtospeakforanyoneotherthanourselves.2.Eachofushas, inquitedifferentways,beenaprotagonist intheplayworkstoryofrecentdecadesandsocannotclaimanobjective,academicperspectiveonthematerialwecover.Whetherthepersonalexperiencewebringtothetasklendsthepapersomeauthenticity,ormerelyinjectsitwithbias,isforthereadertojudge.Certainly,whereverwearecriticalofthefield’sdecisionsatvariouspointsinthestory,wedonotabsolveourselvesofblameforourpartinthem.3. Playwork, as such, is a UK phenomenon, (with its earliest origins in the junkplaygroundsofDenmark)althoughitcannowtobefoundinothercountriestoo.ThispaperisabouttheUKplayworkmovement,butinsofarasitisaboutgovernmentpolicyforplayandplaywork, it isespecially focusedontheEnglishcontext,whichhasbeen,arguably,mostaffectedbychangesat the levelof theUKgovernmentthantheotherthreehomenations,whicheachhavedevolvedadministrations.4.Wewrote this paper for theplaywork community.However,wehope itwill beofinterest to others; and also that it might stimulate and contribute to a constructivediscourse within our field towards a narrative of playwork and its ethos for a muchwider audience.Wewant to be part of conveying the playwork story to aworldwebelieveneedstohearit.AV&GS

4

Introduction‘Thechurchisthemultitudeofthefaithful.’WilliamofOckham(1287–1347)Playwork is not a church –quite the opposite, some might say. Yet we are a smallmultitudeandwehaveakindoffaith.Whatwedescribeandproposeheremayrequireanactof such faith:acollectivewillingness to re-examineour tenetsandexplore thepossibilitiesinaligningthemwithanewandemergingpolitics.Ourfaithrestsinadeepand abiding conviction that what we do, how we do it, and why, is valuable andimportant,inthefaceofsomeevidencethatthisisavanishingminorityview.Adialoguewithinourfieldisurgent,asthecorrosivetwineffectsofsuccessiveyearsofausterity,andtheabsenceofplayandplayworkfromanymeaningfulpolicyframework,remorselesslydismantleandeatawayattheservicesandspaceswithinwhichwework(CRAE, 2015). The debate must be earnest and focused. It must aim to produce abindingnarrativeofplaywork–itsepistemology,itspracticeanditsvalue–thatisbothpersuasive to the uninitiated and yet true to our faith. Itmust be a narrative that iscogentandauthentic,behindwhichwecanallstand.With that prize firmly in mind, this piece is by no means intended as a definitivestatement of what playwork is, how we should describe it or where it should bepositioned inthewiderarenasofpublicandpolitical life.Ours isbutoneperspective,arising from our individual, very different sets of experience in this field, and thedialoguebetweenus.Thereareothersetsofexperiencesandotherperspectivesjustasvalid.Welookforwardtoengagingwiththem.

5

1.Theplayworkethos‘...likegeneticrivers,whoseprimevalforcescomefromsourcesdeepwithinusand,which,inflowingthroughus,giveustheenergyandfocustomakeattemptsatsatisfyingourmostfundamentaldesiresforlifeandunderstanding,ofteninthemosttryingofcircumstances’.BobHughes(2001)What are the characteristics of playwork? What are its ethics?What are its tenets?Howcanembracingthesefacetsofourworkinformourstrategyasafieldandenableus to tellapersuasivestoryabout itsvalue tochildrenandsociety?Howdoessuchanarrativeremaincongruentwithourethos,andyetalsomakeacredibleargumentforasupportivepublicpolicyforplay?Thesearethequestionsweaimtoaddress.ThequalitiesofplayworkWesuggest:• Playwork is emergent. It recognises that play is unpredictable, complex and

immediate.Thenexusofplayworkpracticeisinbeingconscioustotheplayprocess,co-creating playspaces with children and, on their cues, consciously playing withthem.

• Playworkisethical.Itisconcernedwithchildren’srights,mostobviouslytheirrighttoplay(butweholdthatchildren’srightsareinterdependentandindivisible)anditprivilegestheseinwaysthatarenotcommonwithinotherpracticesandservicesforchildrenor,indeed,withinthewidersociety.

• Playworkispolitical.Itissensibleofpower,bothinadult-childrelationshipsandintheallocationanduseofresources.Itresistsdesignsontheplayingchildthatwouldannexplaytoserveotheragendas.

• Playwork is situated. It happens within the lives of children, their families, theircommunitiesandtheirstruggles.

• Playwork is advocatorial. It recognises thatchildrenareengaged ina struggle fortheir right to play, and advocates for it on their behalf, not only in themediatedplayspace, but also within the wider domains of children’s lives and the publicrealm.

• Playwork is universal. Because the struggle for their right to play is a factor ofchildhood,notonlyspecificgroupsofchildren,playworkpracticeanditssituationisapplicabletoallchildren.

6

Thewiderrationaleforthesedescriptions(wheretheyarenotself-evident)ishopefullydevelopedintheensuingtext,butwealsoinvitethefieldtodebate,develop,adaptandelaboratethem.Arobustdiscourseisstronglyencouraged.

Playworktenets Playworkpracticerecognises,bothfromitsreadingofthescientificliteratureandfromits own observations and experiences, that there is a fundamental drive to play(Hughes,2001)andthatthisdriveservesnopurposeotherthantoprovokeplaying.Thisisourfirstandmostfundamentaltenet.Thepracticeofplayworkistomakespaceforandattendtotheresponsetothisdrive,which is playing. We understand this response to be infinite in adaptability andpotentialforms.Whilewerecognisethatplayingiscrucialtothewellbeingofchildrenandthesurvivalofourspecies,thisdoesnotobscureourfirstassumption.Playissimplytodelightinandhasnootherfunctionthanitsownintrinsicactivity.Playingmayleadtoallmannerofincidentaloranticipatedoutcomesandbenefits,buttheyarenotwhatitisforandtheyarenotwhatplaywork is for.Playworkbelievesthatmisunderstandingthisdistinctionanddesigning interventions,spacesandcurriculabasedonthatmisunderstanding isadenialofchildren’srightsandcanbeprofoundlydamaging.TheplayspaceandtheludicecologyThe environment where the drive to playmanifests with practitioner involvement isdeemedtobe theplayspace–amediatedareawithinwhich theplayworker isalsoaplayer. Within the playspace there is a kind of ludic dialectic operating and thepractitioner is conscious of it. It informs both our practice and our personaldevelopment (whichare interdependent).Practitionersareconsciousplayerswithinaludic ecology, which requires careful maintenance and evaluation for richness of

AnoteaboutthePlayworkPrinciplesItisnottheintentionofthispapertoproposeanalternateorrevisedsetofplayworkprinciples(PSG,2005).However,weshouldnotbeaverse,asafield,toreviewingourkey statementsandcodesofpractice fromtime-to-time,toensuretheircontinuedcurrencyandvalidityinevolvingcontexts.Ifwelackarecognisedprocessforsuchatask,thatisamatterofconcern,andonewhichneedstobeaddressed.

7

response. Playwork enriches the environment for playing: physically, geographically,sociallyandculturally.Withinthisrichludicecology,practitionersarethesubjectsoftheirowndevelopment,whereaschildren–beinglargelyunselfconscious–aretheobjectsoftheirs.Aschildrendevelop through playing, playwork practitioners hold the children’s ‘being’ and‘becoming’tobeinseparable,andofequalimportance.Because practitioners’ play is conscious and reflective, it generates insights. Ourconsidered responses to these elucidations are at the heart of our practice. Ourknowledgecommonsisafieldofinsight.The epistemological basis for our work derives from a number of more establishedacademic disciplines – evolutionary biology, depth psychology, ethnography andanthropology, human and spatial geography, developmental psychology, sociology,hermeneutics*, neuroscience and others – but both adds to these perspectives andinterprets them in novel ways, informed by our own research, analysis and evolvingpracticemethods.Playworkisthusauniquefieldofpracticewithlegitimateclaims,inasympatheticpolicycontext,toprofessionalstatus.

AsituatedethosofplayworkTakentogether,thesetenetscouldbesaidtoformthebasisofplayworkpracticewithinthemediated playspace. However, the ludic ecology of the playspace, although in asense discrete, is also inevitably part of other eco-systems, which include otherplayspaces,aswellasmanyconceived,plannedandlivedspaces(potentialplayspaces)thatchildren,withtheirdrivetoplay,havetonavigate.Playwork practice therefore rests in twooperative areas: the first containingmatterswithin themediated playspace, the second containingmatters beyond themediatedplayspace.Bothareasarerelatedtoplayingandareequallyimportant;theinterplayof

*HermeneuticsWe argue that hermeneutics is central to the playwork approach, yet the leastunderstoodofitsepistemologicalfields.Hermeneuticinquiryisaninterpretationandanalysisofmeaning,either from the fieldof researchor fromadjacentdisciplinaryfields.Akeyperspectiveonplayworkpracticeisthatitinvolvestheinterpretationofinsights and reflections on playing, just as we examine and offer enquiry into thechild’splayed-outmaterial(SturrockandElse,1998).

8

allthesefactorsiscentraltoourprofessionalpracticeanditsdevelopment.Ourethosrestsontheiterativereflectionsarisingfromallofthesecriteria.In other words, our practice is situated in the wider context of the child’s life,recognising the significance of context to the child’s ludic ecology. Playwork practicemust reflect this. Our ethos must be situated within the wider community, takingaccountofthecontextsofthechild’scircumstances:theirfamily,theircommunity,theirneighbourhood and their city. These contexts are each, to a greater or lesser extent,politicalandsocio-economic innature.Accordingly,ourpracticealsoneeds tenets forthesituatedandpoliticalnatureofourwork.Wesaymoreaboutthisinpart4,butfirstwewant to elaborate on the policy context for playwork advocacy and its dominantinforming discourse, before reviewing, in part 3, how this discourse has indeed beenallowed to dominate and, we argue, subvert our progression as a community ofpractice.CounteringthedominantdiscourseAchallengeforourfieldisthatthepoliticalandeconomichegemonyissignificantlyatodds with the playwork approach. From a number of perspectives, playwork quiteexplicitly rejects the pervading policy paradigm. The different theoretical bases ofplaywork, and those espousing them,may not always agree, but they each have farmore incommonwithoneanother thantheydowiththeethosofschools,childcare,CAMHSand soon,which are variously predicatedon future-oriented, instrumentalistperspectives,oronproblematisingchildrenfordifferentinterventionsandregimes.LesterandRussell(2008)identifythis‘dominantdiscourse’assomethingthatobscuresthe reality that ‘children’s play has been ‘co-opted’ (citing Smith, 2005) in modern,industrialised societies, as away of improving cognitive and social skills’. In terms ofchild policy, that discourse conceives children as primarily adults-in-the-making andtakes adults tomean economically productive units: employees and consumers. Thiseconomo-centric view pervades to such an extent that the measurable impact onchildren’s monetised future ‘life-chances’, by however convoluted means, is thestandard criteria by which policy initiatives and interventions are judged. Findingevidenceof thepositive impactofplayprovisionon suchmeasurementshasbecometheholygrailofplaypolicyadvocates,howeveroften,byourownadmission,wecomeupshort(Gill,2014).Brown’s (2017) description of ‘what is unique about playwork’ identifies ‘aconceptualisation of the child that actively resists dominant and subordinatingnarratives and practices’, while Hughes (2001) posits that it is precisely the lack oforder,therandomnessoftheenvironment,andthelicenceaffordedtochildrentodo

9

with itwhat theywill, that sets adventure playgrounds apart as ideal places to play;replicating,whendoneproperly, thewild spaces that children’sevolutionary instinctsneedtoencounter.Wood and Kilvington (2018:42) say the playwork approach rests on a belief ‘thatchildrenandyoungpeopledonotneedtobeimprovedordeveloped’byadultsandthat‘playingchildren intuitivelyplay in theway that isnecessary’ for them.Russell (2013)proposes a situated playwork ethos that ‘moves beyond rational, universal rules oroutcomes towards relational ethics, acknowledging the particularity of situations,emotionsandthealterityofothers(childrenandadults)’.Anyoneoftheseperspectivesisradical,hereticaleven,tothedominantdiscourseandthepolitical-economic hegemony that perpetuates it.Whetherwewant to shoot thesacred cow of educational orthodoxy, turn long-established intergenerational powerdynamicsontheirhead,orbringbenignanarchyandablurringofarbitrarydistinctionsintoaworldofconformityandsegregation,playworkisachallengetoestablishedpolicyandpractice in thechildren’ssector, theplay industryandeachof theirconstructsofchildren’splay.Yet,aswithanyoccupationalfieldworkingwithinthepublicpolicyarena,thepolitical-economichegemonyisalsothecontextforourlivelihoodsandtheresourcestosupportour work. How then do we square the circle? The answer until now has been, indifferent ways and to varying degrees, to compromise. We have assumed, notunreasonably, thataddressingtheconcernsofpolicymakers intheirowntermswouldbecrucial ifweweretohaveanysuccessatall inwinningrecognitionandsupportforplaywork.Wherehasthisapproachledus,andwhatcanwelearnfromit?

10

2.Lessonsfrom(recent)history‘WhatwelearnfromHistoryisthatnoonelearnsfromHistory’.OttovonBismarck(1815-1898)‘…ahistoricalunderstandingofchildren’splayagenciessuggeststhattheywereusedtoachieve social andeconomicgoals of the state… children’s playprovisionhasalwaysbeenacontestedareaofsocialpolicy’.KeithCranwell(2003:52)Whatcantheexperienceofourengagementwithpublicpolicy,andoursimultaneousefforts todevelopadistinctprofessional identityandextendour reach, teachus thatmightbeuseful?Although playwork practitioners, academics and trainers have been (and continue tobe) in the vanguard of advocacy for children’s right to play, not just in the UK butinternationally(e.g.LesterandRussell,2010),thefieldisneverthelessinacrisisthatisaboutmorethantheabsenceofasupportivepolicyframework.Somesuggestwehaveadefinitionalcrisis(Newstead,2015)quiteapartfromourstruggletosurviveausterity.Advocacy for improving the status of playwork has tended to focus on the fight forrecognition as a new or emerging profession within the established children’sworkforce.Duringthelatter20thcenturytherewasanincreasinglycohesivecampaignto become better recognised by government and, hence, employers. In the 90s thiscoincided with a major extension in state provision for children and families: ‘thechildcare revolution’,which saw a huge expansion of ‘wrap-around’ and holiday careservices for school-age children as part of the government’s policy to enable parentsbackintowork.The childcare revolution – creatingmany thousands of new, registered, fee-chargingplaceswithina regulated,highly subsidised service industry–representeda threat tothe free, open-access, grass-roots tradition of the adventure playgrounds,where ourpracticehaditsgenesis;butalsoanopportunityforthefieldtoexpandandsecuretherecognitionitaspiredto.Wemayhavewantedadventureplaygroundstoreceivemoresubstantial and reliable funding, and for playwork to establish its own professionalcodesandstructures,butherewasalsoachancetogotrulymainstream:forplayworktobecomethestandardapproachfortheexpandingout-of-schoolchildcaresector.

11

Thefield’scampaigningefforts,alignedwiththoseofothers(aboutwhichmorelater),eventually led, in 1998, to secretary of state Chris Smith challenging the field: toestablish recognised training and qualifications, identify the outcomes of playworkprovision,andspeakwithonevoice.Dothis,hesaid,andthegovernmentwouldlisten.Whiletherewerethosewhosawariskofinstitutionalisingwhathadbeenanorganic,intuitiveway ofworkingwith children (Newstead, 2015), allowing it to be subsumedwithin the instrumental paradigm, the promise of a fulsome government policyresponsewastoogreataprizetoshun.Thefieldhadtiredofstrugglingtosurviveonmeagregrantsandlocalfundraising:wehungeredforabiggersliceofthepubliccake.Better terms and conditions, recognised qualifications, more training and careerdevelopmentopportunitieswerealldesirablegoalsforpractitionersandprojectswhichhad, until then, been largely peripheral to mainstream children’s services – andperenniallyunder-resourced.The structureswe erected during those years, the institutionswe formed or becamepartof,andtheprocessesweengagedwithwereseenasnecessarystepsto joiningapublic sector professional class that would open the door to better recognition andmore resources for ourwork – andwider opportunities formore children to benefitfromit.Orsowethought.Therewas,ofcourse,apricetopay.Oneproblemwasthat,asdiscussed,theedificewesought to become assimilated within was constructed upon assumptions and valuesquitedifferent fromourown.Anotherwas that, in Englandat least, those structureswererarelygovernedby,orultimatelyaccountableto,thefielditself.Anexaminationofhow each of the government’s three demands was met illustrates how these twofactors have taken playwork down cul-de-sacs on our journey to professional status;blindalleysfromwhichwehaveyettoemerge.OccupationalstandardsTaking our place in a workforce development strategy underpinning a majorgovernment policy would mean playwork practice being codified, its training andqualifications approved, within an officially sanctioned vocational framework. Thedevelopment of recognised training and qualifications, the first of the government’schallenges,wasalreadysubstantiallyunderwayby1998–butrecognisedbywhom?Newstead (2015)documentshow itwasplaywork trainerswhohad led thewaywiththe creation in 1975 of the JNCTP, (Joint National Committee on Training forPlayleadership, laterPlaywork),butnotesthatan initiative inthe late1980stodefineplayworkcompetenceswassupersededin1992bythegovernment’sownintroductionofNationalOccupationalStandards(NOS).Shefindsthatplayworktrainingboomedin

12

the light of the recognition afforded by the NOS but that this proliferation ‘raisedquestionsaboutthecontentandconsistencyofplayworktraining’,withthegrowthindemand‘metbyarangeoftrainingproviderswithdifferingexperiences…resultinginvarying interpretationsofwhat constitutes goodplayworkpractice’ (Newstead, 2015:1).In the slipstream of this expansion –fuelled of course by the childcare revolution –during the 90s, the national training organisation for the sport and recreationprofessions,Sprito,andthenitssuccessor,theSectorSkillsCouncil,SkillsActive,workedwithtrainersandserviceproviderstocreateanationalframeworkforplayworktrainingandqualificationsthatwouldestablishplayworkasarecognisedpartofthemainstreamchildren’sworkforce.ButmuchasSkillsActivemayhaveengagedwithpractitioners inthis endeavour, its playwork unit was managed and governed by employers,accountablenottothefieldbuttothegovernment.Morethan25yearsaftertheirintroduction–andtherapidgrowthandevenmorerapiddecline in playwork jobs that followed–Newstead (2015), again, notes that theNOShave yet to properly describe what playwork is or does; posing something of an‘existentialdilemma’(Newstead,2015:5)fortheprofession,regardlessoftheextentofemploymentandtrainingopportunities.Furthermore,theplayworkunitatSkillsactiveis currently, well, inactive, if not closed down altogether, meaning that, in Englandanyway,itisunclearhowthisdilemmaistoberesolved.Bestplay?Parallel with playwork practise becoming part of the official children’s workforce,government recognition would also, increasingly, mean playwork provision beingmanaged and inspected in ways consistent with other children’s services and theirpolicyframework.Withitsoverarchingpolicynotexplicitlyinterestedinchildrenplayingasanendinitselfuntil2008(andthenonlyfortwoyears),thegovernment’ssecondchallengetothefieldin the late90swas to identifymeasurableoutcomes forplayworkprovision.Thiswasmet in the first instancebyBestPlay (NPFAet al, 2000), adocument, producedby abroad alliance of play professionals represented by three different national bodies(none of them discretely representing the playwork perspective1), which aimed totackletheperennialconundrumofhowtodefinetheaims,objectivesandoutcomesof

1Oneofthethree,PLAYLINK,emergedfromtheformerLondonAdventurePlaygroundAssociation(LAPA),whichcouldbedescribedasaplayworksupportanddevelopmentbodybut,initslateriteration,hadtakenonabroaderplaypolicyrole.

13

playworkwithout compromising its longstandingprinciple of supporting andenablingchildren’srighttoplayforitsownsake.BestPlayassertsthatthekeytochildrenaccruingbenefits fromprovision isthattheyare firstandforemostenabledto ‘extendthechoiceandcontrol theyhaveovertheirplay,thefreedomtheyenjoyandthesatisfactiontheygainfromit’(NPFAetal,2000:13). This is the first ‘outcome objective’. There follow three other ‘immediate’objectives: that ‘the provision: recognises the child’s need to test boundaries andrespondspositivelytothatneed;managesthebalancebetweentheneedtoofferriskand the need to keep children safe from harm; and maximises the range of playopportunities’(NPFAetal,2000:14-16).Sofar,soplaywork,thedocumentfoesontoassertthatbydeliveringthesefour‘immediateobjectives’,provisioncouldbeexpectedto‘foster’somesecondary,longer-termoutcomesforchildren(objectives5–7),suchas‘selfesteem’,‘respectforothers’and‘healthygrowthanddevelopment’.OnecriticismoftheBestPlaymodelconcernstheprincipleoffullyinformedconsent,acentraltenetofresearchethics(Boddy,2016),whichismorecomplexthanimpliedbytheadoptionofasimpleconsentform.AlthoughBestPlayisprimarilyatooltoevaluateplaywork services and spaces (objectives 1-4), the ‘secondary’ objectives, 5-7, arepersonalandsensitive.Monitoringsuchaspectsofachild’slife,forwhateverpurpose,constitutesanintimateformofsocialresearchand,itisargued,shouldconformtothehighestethicalstandards.Yet,becauseBestPlayisframedwithintheconceptof‘monitoringandevaluation’itisquestionablehowoftenorhowrigorouslysuchstandardswere,orare,adheredto. Inaccumulating portfolios of ‘evidence’ to satisfy contextual requirements, Best Playbypasses researchdisciplines suchas the cycleof formulatingand testinghypotheses(Rudestam and Newton, 2001) and analysing data. Observation merely feeds theconceptual framework,making the process neither truly deductive nor inductive, butmerelybureaucraticandself-referential.TheBestPlaymethodwasnotdesignedforagenuineinquiry,buttofindtheevidenceforsomepre-supposedoutcomes inorder tosatisfyextraneousdemands for them. Itresolved the ‘fundamental tension between supporting play for its own sake andseekingpublicfundingforworkwhichcanaddressidentifiedproblemsofsocialpolicy’(Russell, 2018) in favour of the latter. It is a research tool that both fails to link itsmethodologytoatheoreticalandethicalperspective(Crotty,1998)–and,itisargued,underminesthefirsttenetofplayworkpractice.

14

‘Onevoice’Thethirdgovernmentchallengetothefieldin1999,to‘speakwithonevoice’,wasmetbytheChildren’sPlayCouncil(CPC).Originallyastandingroundtableforthevariousnational(and,later,regional)voluntaryandpublicsectorplayandplayworkorganisations–tocoordinatestrategicinfluencingactivityforchildren’srighttoplay–CPCanditssuccessorbody,PlayEngland,evolvedintoaquasiorganisationinitsownright,andcanbeconsideredinmanyrespectstohavebeenthehubofahighlyeffectiveadvocacynetwork.Itarticulatedanultimatelypersuasivepolicynarrativeforplayandplayworkthatledtounprecedentedgovernmentinitiativesforplay,underpinnedbyalmost£390mofpublicfundingfrom2006-112.AnexaminationofthePlayStrategy’s(DCSF/DCMS,2008)designrevealsthatmeasurestosupportplaywork,whoseadvocateshadbeensomeof, ifnotthe, leadingvoices inthe campaign, were overshadowed by the degree of investment in what wereeuphemisticallytermed‘unsupervisedplayareas’.ThefluidandperviousnatureoftheCPC/PlayEnglandadvocacynetworkand theambivalent roleof its ‘parent’body, theNational Children’s Bureau (NCB)3, meant that the playwork perspective was alwayscompeting with others –and, crucially, had no representative body to make itsargumentswithdueweight.Furthermore, equipment manufacturers and their industry bodies – with their clearcommercial interest in promoting a specific and already dominant form of playprovision – had, via their positionswithin this network, unprecedented access to thepolicymakingprocess.AlthoughPlayEnglanddidnotproposeit,itshouldperhapshavecomeasnosurprisewhenalmost70percent(£160m)ofthePlayStrategybudgetwasallocatedtoinstalling3000moreofthefixedequipmentplaygroundsthatareinmanywaystheantithesisoftheplayworkapproach,evengivenPlayEngland’s(Shackelletal,2008) government-endorsed efforts to break the mould of the sterile, risk averseapproach, which had come to be characterised as the ‘KFC’ (Kit, Fence and Carpet)4playground.

2Anestimated£30-40mofthissumwasnot,intheevent,spentonchildren’splay,afterthenewcoalitiongovernmentin2010removedthering-fencingofmuchlocalauthorityfunding,andalsorequiredapercentageofunspentmoneytobereturnedtotheTreasury(Voce,2015).Theprecisefigureisnotknownasthefundingwasnolongermonitoredafterthistime.3NCB,thenationalchildren’sservicescharity,wasfirstamemberofCPCbutthenbecamethe‘host’organizationunderaletterofagreementunderwhichitheldcontractsandemployedstaffonbehalfofthecouncil.IntheabsenceofanindependentCPCconstitution,this,ultimatelyputNCBincharge,notjustofCPC,butitssuccessor,PlayEnglandanditslotterymillions–untilthelatterbecameindependentin2014,withitsbudgetlongsincedepleted.

15

Whospeaksforplaywork?No field speakswithone voice, butpolicy studies (e.g.Hill, 2005) suggest that in themessy and fluid processes of public policy formation (Acosta, 2012), the greatestinfluence isoftenexercisedbyactorseitherwith thegreatest capacity,or theclosestconnections to the current hegemony. Of course playwork has nomonopoly on playadvocacy, and it is inevitable that any dialogue around workforce development andpublicprovisionwillincludeastrongrepresentationfromemployersandsectorindustrybodies.Ourchallengeistoformamandatedpractitionerbodythatcanbetheirequal,ratherthanassumingthatabroadallianceofthe‘children’splaymovement’willensureourvoiceisheard,orthatindividualpractitionersandtrainerscanfillthisrolebysittingonvariousgroupsthatareadvisorytostructuresandprocesseswherethedecisionsaretakenelsewhere.SturrockandElse(1998:20)suggestthatplaywork’sbenefitstochildrenarisepreciselybecause practitioners are not agents of societal designs on them, and our currentprinciples‘includeactingasadvocatesforplaywhenengagingwithadultledagendas’.It isakeypartoftheplayworkerroletospeakforchildren’splay.Butwhospeaksforplaywork?

4KFC:Kit,Fenceandcarpet,atermcoinedbyHelenWoolley,UniversityofSheffield,todenotethestereotypicalmunicipalplaygroundanditspoorplayvalue.

16

3.Re-situatingplaywork‘Ifthegovernmentcannotcreatehappiness(Dekid)foritspeople,thereisnopurposeforthegovernmenttoexist’(Bhutan’slegalcode,datingfromunificationin1729)If one clear lesson for playwork from the play strategy experience in England is thatmakingalliancescanmeanlosingcontroloftheagenda,anotheristhatrelyingonalliesfor organisational capacity can mean losing control altogether. After the change ofadministration in 2010, terms like ‘under the aegis of’ suddenly translatedas ‘ownedby’,ashostorganisationsscrambledtoconsolidateinthefaceofswingeingcutsandthelossofgovernmentcontracts. Ifour fieldhadenjoyedthepatronageof larger ‘parentorganisations’,wesaw in themonthsandyearsafter the financial crash that it isnotonlyinthejunglewhereparentswillsometimeseattheiryoung.As it was with our infrastructure, so it was too with national policy. Since 2010 thetreatmentofchildren’splaybytheUKgovernmenthasmirroredpreciselytheplaceinwhichitisheldwithinitsinformingdiscourse.Howcoulditbeotherwise?Thefinancialcrashof2007-08andthegovernmentresponsetoitrevealedhowpaper-thinweretheplatitudes of politicians calling for children to have ‘everyday adventures’ (Cameron,2007) in ‘spaces where they can play, where they can feel completely free’ (Clegg,2010).ThenewCoalitionGovernmentoftheConservativesandtheLiberalDemocratscancelled the10-year Play Strategywithin amonthof takingoffice and subsequentlydeleted any reference to children’s play fromministerial portfolios (CRAE, 2015). Thecurrentgovernment’spolicyonplayisthatithasnone.Coupledwitheightyearsofausterity,theabsenceofnationalpolicyforplayhastakenits toll on a field that was still emerging as a nascent profession (CRAE, 2015).Playgrounds and services have closed, qualifications been withdrawn, coursescancelled.Manyplayworkersareredundantorhavemovedontogreenerpastures.But what if austerity and the premature end of the government’s play strategy inEnglandwereblessingsindisguise?Whatifthedecimationofourinfrastructurebodies,asour sponsorsandhosts cannibalisedour resources for theirownsurvival, is in factpreciselywhatneededtohappenforplayworktocometotherealisationthat itmuststandfor itselfandnotcompromiseonitsethos?Indeed,what iftheentireeconomicand political hegemony fromwhich we have tried so hard to achieve recognition, isitself crumbling; its falsepremisesandoutmodedeconomicmodelsbeginning togivewaytoanewpolitics,whereintheplayworkethosismuchmoretrulysituated?

17

KateRaworth(2017:292)writesthat‘ifeconomieschangebyevolving…weallhaveahand in shaping that evolution because our actions are continually remaking theeconomy, (by) enshrining living purpose in the enterprise we set up; exercising ourrights to parental leave from work; contributing to the knowledge commons; andcampaigning with political movements that share our economic vision’. These areindividual choices. How much more of a hand might we have in evolving a neweconomic paradigm if we also align ourselves, as a field of practice,with a new andemergingsocio-politicalmovement?Pilling(2018)writeshow,‘in1972,thefourthkingofBhutanmadehiscountrythefirstin theworld todeclaregrossnationalhappinessandnotdomesticproduct theprimeorientation of government policy’ –a fanciful notion at the time, perhaps, butincreasingly, the underpinning assumption of the global economic system –thatconsistent growth as measured in Gross Domestic Product, must be the sustainingdriverofgovernmentpolicy–iscomingintoquestion.Thisisnotaneconomictreatise(we are not qualified for that) but there are newmodels emerging, for governance,polityandeconomicmanagementthatwouldplaceagreaterpremiumnotonfuture-orientededucation forcompetitiveproductivityandconsumption,butonexperientialwellbeing,cooperation,self-sufficiencyandhappiness.Ludiccapital,ludiccommons‘Forchildrentohavethebestchancetobehappy,healthyandtoprosper,theyneedtohavea real stake in thecommonspacesof theirneighbourhoods.Amongst thehustleand bustle of our modern towns and cities we need to engender local ‘village’communities,wherechildrenare lookedafter inthewidestsense.Thismuststartwithsomewhereforourchildren-allourchildren-toplay’.(DavidLammyMP,2007)Theemergenceofcrediblealternativeeconomicmodels isan increasinglyurgentone,as each new measure of the effects of climate change reveals the impendingenvironmental catastrophe to be even worse than previously predicted. Such adiscoursebringsintoplay(nopunintended)theideaofludiccapital;akindofwealththat is generated nowhere more prolifically than in the mediated playspaces of ourpractice.Kane’s(2004)‘ThePlayEthic’mayhavesetoutamanifestoforanewwayofworking that ispopularamong thehipster classesanddigital start-upcompanies,butwherevertherearebarrierstochildrenplayingfreelywithinthepublicdomain,itisontraditionaladventureplaygroundsandotherplayworkmediatedplayspaces that ludiccapital is really created. The trailblazing work in places like Wrexham begins todemonstrate that theplayworkapproach, inasympatheticpolicycontext,canextend

18

such resources to create a ludic commons beyond the mediated playspace, intogenuinelychild-friendlyneighbourhoods.Where the subordinationof children is no longer normalised, everything can change.Thus, in a world invested more in the presence of ludic capital than the futureprojection of economic achievement, and the growth of a ludic commonsmore thanmonetised,privatised‘publicspace’,thecommencinggrammarsofcivicrule-formation,governance and what we complacently call ‘democracy’, can be re-imagined andrewritten.Scientific inquiry, from many perspectives, has long established that playing is thewellspring of cultural creativity and the mainstay of children’s resilience andadaptability(LesterandRussell,2008).Ludiccapitalsimplyvaluesthis,andrepositionstheplayspaceaccordingly–totheheartofbothpublicrealmandeducationpolicy,eachdesignedtocreateoptimumconditionsforchildrentolearnhowtobethemselves,toplayout theirunfinishedbusiness, tobe responsible forhow theyuse their timeandtheir space; to learn co-operativity, custodianship, risk and relationshipmanagementandsustainableliving–andmanyotherthingswecannotimagineforthem–allwithinunique,person-centredcommunityspacesthattheycancalltheirown.Muchhasbeenwritten,withinvarioussciences,abouttherelevanceofplaytohumanevolution.Currently,evolutionisatheoryinsomethingofacrisisofitsown,withmanyof its longstanding assumptions being re-evaluated. In particular, ideas about thecompetitive nature of intra-species, not just inter-species behaviour, as originallyinterpreted through the prism of the burgeoning capitalist economy of the BritishEmpire, are coming to be seen as politically situated. ‘Survival of the fittest’ was amaxim that chimed well with the assumed superiority of the ruling classes and theemerging industrial powerbrokers, with their right therefore not just to exploitresourcesbuttosubjugatepeople.Thiswasthe‘naturalorder’.Recentstudiessuggestthatevolutionwithin species–especially social species– ismoreconcernedwith thefitnesstocooperatethantocompete.Damasio(2018)notesthat‘theabilityespeciallydeveloped in humans, to work cooperatively with others to achieve a discernable,sharedgoal’hasbeenacrucialqualityofourspecies’evolution.Theplaygroundaseco-niche Ifchildren’splay isanevolutionary imperative,thenadventureplaygroundsandotherenrichedorwildplayspacesareeffectiveeco-nichesforadaptiverehearsal. Inaworldthat dedicates the upbringing of its young to the sustenance of an economic systemthatisprovingtobefundamentallyunsustainable,attendingtochildren’sadaptationtoadifferentorderofchallengeshasthepotentialtoreshapethatworld.

19

Damasio (2018)goesontostatethat ‘co-operativityreliesonanotherwell-developedhumanability:jointattention’,andthatthisqualityisfundamentaltolearning.Theludicdialectic that takes place in the enriched environments of themediated playspace isabundant in this cooperative, jointly attentive learning; such that adventureplaygrounds may be seen as evolutionary hot spots: micro-ecosystems where the‘futuregenerations’belovedofpolitical speechwriters, rather thanbeing trainedanddirected towards the futurewe have planned for them, are busy creating their own,momentbyplayfulmoment.Thisistherealbusinessofplaying–butonlyrealisableifoneunderstands,asplayworkersdo,thatbeingandbecomingarenotbinarystatesbuta constantly evolving dynamic. Paying attention to the outcome, rather than to themoment of playing, adulterates this dynamic and interferes with an ancientevolutionaryprocess.Educationforwhat?Withinthedominantdiscoursethisisheresy.Here,themorecommonlyrecognisedroleoftheadultistosteeranddirecttheplayingchildinpursuitofspecificlearninggoals.Outsidetheclassroomorthenurseryschool,theplayofchildren–withoutthebenefitof adult direction, is deemedunimportant,which iswhyplaytime, or recess, is beingsteadilyeroded.In public policy, play is generally conceived, if at all, as instrumental to educationalprogress.Evenonitsownterms,however,educationpolicy,isnolongerfitforpurpose.64percentofchildrenwho leftschool in1996aredoing jobsthatdidnotthenexist.Theinexorablegrowthofautomation,minituarisationandthedigitaleconomywillnotonly accentuate this trend but lead to the growth of a post-work society, whereinuniversalbasicincomewillbecomeanincreasinglynecessarysolution.These changes, compounding the effects of the financial crash, have given rise to anemergingnewclass.No longerabletorelyonreliableemployment, liveablewagesorsecure accommodation,millions of people around theworld are effectively denizensratherthanfullcitizens–deniedthefundamentalconditionsoflivingfullyparticipatoryliveswithintheirowncommunities.Theriseof‘theprecariat’Such endemic insecurity – invariably accompanied by habitat and spatial poverty –withinthedevelopedworldeconomies,wherecapitalwealthcontinuestoaccumulateto the richest few per cent and inequalities widen, has produced a growing state ofsocialandeconomicflux.Povertyenduresbutisnowsupplementedbytheevenlarger-

20

scalephenomenonofawholeclassofpeoplelivingontheedge.Thegig-economy,zero-hours and short-term contracts, along with an increasingly unaffordable housingmarket,hasledtotheswellingofwhatStanding(2011)calls‘theprecariat’:individualsandfamilieswhoaremoredenizenthancitizenandwhohedescribescollectivelyasa‘class-in-waiting’.Morerecenteventssuggestitisaclassawakening–andplayworkhasastrongaffinitywithit.Thismovement arises partly fromwithin the precariat and its struggle for economicsecurity, and partly fromwithin other oppressed groups and their perennial fight forsocial and legal justice. Its political development is not along the usual left-rightideological axis, but across a spectrum of activity resisting injustice, demandingenvironmentalaction,fightingoppressionandconcernedwiththeformationofsurvivalstrategiesforthepost-industrial,post-work,post-patriarchalworld.Thisisamovementforhumanrightstobeenshrinedascitizens’rights,andthereforeacongruentalignmentforouradvocacyandactivistroles,aswellasanaturalcontextforourpractice.Manyofusinthisfieldareininsecure,poorlypaidjobs,ifany,andworkwith communitiesat the sharpendofausterity.Wecan identify individuallywith theprecariat,andoursitesandourservicesarelargelysituatedwithinit.But playwork’s position on children’s rights means that our perspective on whocomprises the precariat is not confined to the more deprived or insecure socio-economic classes. We are not a targeted service, problematising different groupsdeemedtobeinneedofourintervention.Ourcontributiontothenewpolitics isthatchildrenasagroupcanbeconceivedaspartoftheprecariat:deniedtheirhumanrightsanddeniedspatialjustice,whatevertheirsituationorclass.ThePlayingOutmovementmayarisefromwithinamoremiddle-classdemographicthanthetypicalusergroupsforadventure playgrounds, but it is amistake to not recognise it as a kindred advocacynetwork.Whereverchildrenaredeniedspacetoplay,thereisadenialoftheirhumanrights,andthereshouldgoplaywork.This perspective, which is central to our ethos, has immense unifying potential. Theinjusticewechallengeisuniversal,crossingallparty,classandsocio-economicdivides.Inasense italsobindsgenerationstogether. Ifchildrenarepartoftheprecariatthenarewenotall,whohavebeenchildrenandthusdisempoweredandmarginalised;eventhoseofusseducedbymaterialadvantageandweightedpowerprivilege?The struggle we need to commit to, then, is not between different alignments ofpeople, but between people and non-human entities: corporations, institutions,reactionary, patriarchal politics and economic dogmas.Our ethical practice delivers avital mechanism for rebalancing power not from one group to another, but from a

21

dehumanisedpolityandself-servingeconomy, to individualchildrenandcommunitiesofchildren,whereverandhowevertheyaresituated.Asituatedpracticeofplaywork Inthisvisionofanewsociety,playworkisashared,intra-subjectivemethodofworkingwithchildreninallcontexts.Wewillthereforeneedtodefineandestablishlearningintheplayspaceasan innateprocess,anddelineateaspecific ludiccurriculum,whereintheadultpresenceisnotforteaching,butforco-learning:throughconscious,reflectiveplaywork.Thewellbeing(andwell-becoming)ofbothchildandpractitionerwilleachbethe subject of active processes, under constant review. Practitioners will base theirworkonplay:playinganddevelopingthroughplayasamethod;enteringintotheludiccurriculumthroughplaying;reflectingonandevaluatinginsightsgainedtherein.In this reframingof ourpractice, thepractitionerwill seeplaying as the commencinglocus of all civic and cultural development and growth. The foundation of the ludiccurriculum, in full cognisance of disciplinary boundaries, will be the conscious act ofplaying and developing. Playfulness and creativitywill be seen as central to both theplaying, developing child and the self-development of the practitioner. Self-developmentwillbethekeytocontinuingprofessionalpractice.Within this default curriculum the playworker is seen as an active researcher with apractice based on an interpretive epistemological rigour. Our epistemology draws onevolutionary biology, anthropology, neuroscience, depth psychology and otheracademicperspectives,includingthenewsocialstudiesofchildhood,butourpractice,based on our own hermeneutic inquiry, deploying ethical, situated and non-representational researchmethods grounded in the privileged culture of playworkingwith children over many decades, is essentially original and immanent. Our situatedpractice will generate insights and contributions to a mainstreamed discourse aboutplayandcreativitythatiscrucialtooursociety’sgrowingunderstandingofhowchildrenthrive,learnanddevelop.‘Thisisnoteducation’,theywillcryfromwithinthehegemonicestablishment;‘childrenneedtobeeducatedandadultsneedtoteachthem’.Yetweknowthatplaying isthe‘genetic tool’ that enables children’s development. Learning is implicit within theplayspace. The eco-niche of the adventure playground makes it an especially richenvironment for the enhancement of ecological, cooperative intelligences – the eco-literacyandsustainabilitythatissourgentlyneeded.Ifwe stay true to this, ouruniquepractice, share it aswidely and freely aswe can–throughtraining,communitydevelopmentandlocalactivism–itwillintimeleadtothe

22

longer-term status and recognition we aspire to; but within a new pedagogicalparadigm.Ifwealsoapplyitnotjusttothemediatedplayspace,buttotheurgentandnecessary task of reimagining the public realm to engender child-friendly, playablestreets and neighbourhoods, situated within a vibrant, ludic commons peopled byresilient,sustainablecommunitiesof interdependentcitizens,wewillbeacentralandvaluedworkforcefortheemergingneweconomyandthesocietyitwillserve.Inthisvision,therolesofteacher,playworker,youthworkerandsocialworkerconvergeandoverlapwithinaholistic,ludic-creativepedagogy;recognisingthatwhatallchildrenand all adults need is fundamentally the same:mutual respect for and realisation oftheirhumanrightswithinsocial,physicalandculturalenvironmentswheretheycanfeelsafe,secureandattached,soastoplayoutwhotheyareandwhotheyarebecoming.Wepaintautopianpicture,perhaps. It isaworldreimaginedrather thananticipated.Butethicalpracticerequiressuchavision.Wemayneverseeitfully,orevenpartially,realised;buttheplayworkethos,impliedbyourexistingprinciples,compelsustoaskofanygivenchoicewearefacedwith,eitherasindividualpractitionersorasacollectivecommunity, ‘which will bring it closer?’ Thus, in the real world, as we once againregroup,forgealliancesandsetouttomakethepolicycaseforplayworktoaseeminglyunreceptivebodypolitic,whatisournarrativeanditsrationale,andaretheycongruentwiththisvision?

23

4.Solvingtheplayworkconundrum‘AndsomeofthebiggerbearstrytopretendThattheycameroundthecornertolookforafriend;AndtheytrytopretendthatnobodycaresWhetheryouwalkonthelinesorthesquares.’(AAMilne,1924)Russell (2008)notes the ‘fundamentalcontradiction (of)understandingchildren’splayas autotelic and self-organising on the one hand, and on the other seeking andaccounting forpublic fundingthatrequiresservicestoaddresspolicyagendas’.This isindeed our perennial conundrum – but only so long as there is no policy for playinformedbysuchanunderstanding.Theargumentthatchildren’srights–toplay,toparticipate,tobeheard,tohavespace–shouldbeacentralplankofthenewpolitics,isacompellingone.Theplayworkethosisatonewithacorephilosophyofuniversalrightsandcitizenship.Playworkpracticeisanapproachthatsitsnaturallyattheheartofareconstructedroleforallthoseworkingwithchildreninthisnewsocietalvision.And,crucially,achildren’srightsframeworkforplay policy has no need to annex play to other agendas. But does such an approachhaveanytractionwithcurrentpolicymakers?Basingthepolicycaseforchildren’splayonarightsdiscourse,evensincetheUNCRC’s(2013)generalcommentonarticle31,isoftenrejectedbyadvocateswhobelieve,withsome justification, that UK policymakers are generally ambivalent about children’srights in general, and indifferent to children’s play in particular. Sutton-Smith (1997)describeshowtheprogressrhetoricofchilddevelopment‘subordinates…intrinsicplayfunctionstootherextrinsicdevelopmentalfunctions…’becausetheoristsare‘primarilyconcerned with child socialisation and maturity, and children’s civilised progress ingeneral’. But,while Lester andRussell (2008) areundoubtedly correct in theiroverallthesis, that thisparticularbiashashada greatholdon childpolicy, it is amistake toregarditasanenduringmaxim.Indeed,themostsignificantbreakthroughsinmodernplaypolicy (inwhich Lester andRussell’s critiquehasbeenanot insignificant factor),suggeststhishasnowbecomeaself-defeatingfallacyforplaypolicyadvocates.Arguably themost significantnational governmentplaypolicy anywhere in theworldarisesnotfromthedrivetoimpactonfutureoutcomesforchildren,butfromanexplicitcommitment to children’s right to play as an obligation of government. The WelshGovernmentPlayPolicy,andsubsequentimplementationplan,isbasedontheprinciplethat,asasignatory(aspartoftheUK)totheUNCRC,itshouldtherefore‘contributeto

24

creating an environment that fosters children’s play’ (Welsh Assembly Government,2005:1).Thishasprovidedtheplatformforwhathasbeendescribedbyplayadvocatesas‘abeautifulpieceoflegislation’:theplaysufficiencyduty(WelshGovernment,2011)onlocalauthoritiestoassessandplanforchildren’splayopportunitiesacrosstheirarea.Althoughdramaticallymoreshort-livedthan itscounterpart inWales, theEnglishPlayStrategy (DCSF/DCMS, 2008) also offers a counter-argument to the tacticalinstrumentalismespousedbythepragmatists.ThePlayStrategyarosefromaverydifferentpolicyframeworktothatembracedbytheWelshAssembly;theUKgovernmentbeingmuchmoreambivalentonchildren’srights.(ItsoverarchingEveryChildMatterspolicywasarguablythezenithofthetarget-driven,outcomes-focused approach that characterised the New Labour years). Nevertheless,aftermanyyearsofadvocatesdiligentlyandpersistently ‘making thecase’ (e.g.Cole-HamiltonandGill,2002)thePlayStrategysimilarlycommittedlocalgovernment(inthiscase incentivised not by legislation but significant central funding 5 ) to assessingchildren’sopportunitiesforplaying,anddevelopingplanstoextendandimprovethem.Bowingtopressurethat‘enjoyandachieve’(oneoftheuniversaloutcomesitclaimedtohavederivedfromconsultingchildrenthemselves)didnotmeanenjoyingschool,thegovernmenteventuallyconcededthatthedegreeofsatisfactionchildrenderivedfromtheir local play opportunities should be the only measure of the strategy’s success6(Voce,2015).Notwithstandingtheunhelpfullydisproportionateemphasisonincreasingandrenewingthe stock of fixed equipment playgrounds, as previously discussed, the Play Strategydemonstrated,alongwiththeWelshPlayPolicy,thatgovernmentpolicycanbeshapedtorespondtochildren’sneedandrighttoplayforitsownsake.Infact,themodelforthe Play Strategy – requiring local authorities to assess their areas and preparecrosscutting localplay strategies to improveopportunities–wasbasedonapolicyoftheLondonMayor (2004)which, like thatofWelshAssemblygovernment,wasbasedexplicitlyonchildren’srights.

5ThePlayStrategy(2008)andtheChildren’sPlay(2006)lotteryinitiativethatprecededandoverlappedwithit,followingagovernmentdirective,committed£390mtochildren’splayinEngland,over5years,althoughseefootnote2(p14).6ThespecificmeasureofthenationalPlayStrategy’sprogress,andtheinstrumentbywhichlocalauthoritiescould(hadthepolicynotbeensubsequentlyabandoned)secureadditional,follow-onfundingfortheirlocalplaystrategies,wasaNationalPerformanceIndicator(NPI199),introducedbytheUKgovernmentinEnglandin2009,whichsimplyaskedchildrenacrossthecountrytoscoretheirsatisfactionwiththeirlocalplayopportunities.

25

Russell (2008) observes that the ‘progress rhetoric’ (Sutton-Smith, 1997) is sonormalised that, even for initiatives such as these, the relevant documents are to agreatextentcouchedinthelanguageoftheinstrumental,future-focusedorientationofthedominantdiscourse,butthisshouldnotcloudthefactthatonly10orsoyearsagothreemajorgovernmentadministrationsintheBritain–London,WalesandtheUK(forEngland) – each adopted substantial, strategic measures to improve and extendchildren’sopportunitiestoplayasapolicyobjectiveinitsownright.Fromtheevidenceofexperiencethen,thereisnoreasontobelievethatinstrumentaldesignsonchildren’splay are theonly basis for its considerationby serious government policy –quite thecontrary.Thisisimportant.Thepragmaticargumentisthattherationaleforsupportingchildren’splay is irrelevant, so longas it is supported,but thisassumes thatpolicyaimsdonotshape the design of services, influence practice or ultimately affect children’sbehaviours. Yet research in Canada finds that framing children’s playwithin a healthagenda, for example, has the effect of narrowly defining it in a way that disregardsmuchofitsepistemologyandcanleadtodistortion,neglectingsomekindsofplayinginfavourofothers. Inparticular, ‘by regulating children’splay tobehealthyandactive,andthusnormalisingthewaysinwhichchildrenareencouragedtoplay,otherrelevantqualities of play may be neglected’ (Alexander et al, 2014: 155). In the language ofplaywork,certainplaytypesbecomeprivilegedoverothers–evenfromchildren’sownperspective.This is adulteration embedded in policy, and it is part of our ethical practice asadvocates for play to resist it. Part of our narrative is the scientific case for theimportance of playing as an end in itself, and the provision of space – social andemotional,aswellasphysicalspace–forchildrentoengageinallplaytypes.Thisdoesnot preclude extoling thebenefits of playing – indeed this is another key part of thenarrative–butitdoesruleoutannexingchildren’splaytoserveotheragendas.Anewpolicyforplay?‘Playisessential,notanoptionalextra.TheUNCRCrecognisestheright“toengageinplayandrecreationalactivitiesappropriatetotheageofthechild”.Butformanylocalauthoritiesthereisnownobudgetformaintenanceorimprovementstoplayareas’.JeremyCorbyn(2015)Ifanyseniorpoliticianofanystripe,letalonetheleaderofoneofthetwomainparties,declaresforchildren’srighttoplayandthegovernment’sresponsibilitytodeliveronit,we should be exploitingwhat they say for all it isworth. JeremyCorbyn’s statement

26

aboutplaywasnotpartofaLabourPartyinitiative,buthisresponsetoawide-rangingreportfromanAllPartyParliamentaryGroup(2015),withprominentmembersfromallsidesofbothhouses, includingSarahWoollaston, the influentialConservativechairofthe Health Select Committee and Baroness Floella Benjamin, the popular and highprofilechildren’schampionwhorepresentstheLiberalDemocrats.Children’s playmaybe their ‘forgotten right’, butwhenpeople are remindedof it, itresonates. If we can be organised and strategic enough to engage with them, playadvocatesstillhavefriendsandalliesinpositionsofmajorinfluenceacrossthepoliticalspectrum. The cause of children’s right to play is as strong and relevant as ever.Playworkcanbe–mustbe–be in thevanguardof the lobbytobuildonthepoliticalsupportforthatcause.It is truethatthepolicies inEnglandandWalesthatbuckedthe instrumentalist trendand set such dramatic precedents for government action on children’s right to playwere adopted in a different era. Although littlemore than a decade has passed, thefinancial crash, and theUK government’s response to it since 2010, has changed thelandscapeentirely.Butthisisareasonforoptimism,notpessimism.Thereversalofthebreakthrough inEnglandwas causedbyamajor, globaleconomicevent,notbecausethepolicyfailed,orevenfelloutoffavourperse.When the tide turns, as itmust, there isno reason tobelieve children’splaywill notagain become a priority. Constructing a comprehensive national policy for children’splayisnotpartofautopiandream.TheUNCommitteeontheRightsoftheChildsaysitisanobligationofgovernmentnow.Thereisnoonebetterqualifiedthentheplayworkcommunity, working with allies but clear about our own agenda, to interpret thatobligationfortheUKcontext.

27

Conclusion“Forplayworkers,theplayprocesstakesprecedenceandplayworkersactasadvocatesforplaywhenengagingwithadultledagendas”.ThePlayworkPrinciples(PPSG,2005)What we have outlined is a long-term vision for playwork practice as the standardapproach to working with children in redesigned public services and within areimagined, de-institutionalised public realm, where adventure playgrounds are farmorenumerousandbetterresourced;whereschoolsareincreasinglyplacesofplayfulco-learning and creativity, adopting more and more of the ludic curriculum; whereplayfulness, well-being, co-operativity and sustainable living are at the heart ofmainstream education; and public spaces are conceived andmaintained as common,playableareas for theenjoymentof thewholecommunityand thenurturanceofoursharedeco-system.Thefull realisationofthisvisioncanonlybeachievedthroughasubstantialchange inthe dominant discourse around education, child development and children’s rights –and a shift in the political-economic paradigm that sustains it. But incremental stepstowards its fulfilment from a playwork perspective are more achievable than isgenerallyimaginedinthewakeofausterityanditsimpactonourfield.Therationaleandframework forgovernmentplaypolicysetout inGeneralComment17(CRC,2013)isourbridgebetweentheplayworkethos,theworlditimagines,andacrediblecaseforplaypolicynow.Themeansbywhichwetraversethisbridgeisouradvocacy.Thefuelforthejourneyisourfaith.

28

Recommendations‘Narrative has been observed to be central to the policy process – constituting publicpolicyinstruments,persuadingdecisionmakersandthepublic,andshapingallstagesofthepolicyprocess’(DeseraiCrowandMichaelJones,2018)Ifthis‘think-piece’resonatesinanyway,thenletitbealsoacalltoarms.Theparadigmwillnotshiftitself.Butwearepragmatiststoo.Everyjourneybeginswithasinglestepand we do not want to end this contribution without suggesting some achievableobjectivesforthecurrentplayworkcommunity.1.Adoptacohesiveplayworknarrative CrowandJones(2018)observethatnarrativeisthekeytopolicyadvocacy,findingthatan over-reliance on either empirical evidence (the ‘knowledge fallacy’) or emotionalappeals(the‘empathyfallacy’)tendtoleadtomiscommunicationandultimatefailure.Rather, they suggest, effectiveadvocatesmusthaveagood story to tell. It shouldbedeeply grounded in science and ethics, but also be relatable and follow the timelessconventionsof storytelling;plot, victim,villainandhero (whereonespolicyproposalsareclearlythehero).Playworkhasaverygoodstorytotellandtherearemanyexcellent iterationsof itbysomeaccomplishedstorytellers.Thepolicynarrativeweneedwillbindthesetogetherin a way that accommodates the different perspectives that have evolved, andcommunicatesourcompellingmoraltoawideaudience.2.Makethepolicycaseforchildren’srighttoplayWesuggestthatthebridgetopublicpolicyshouldbeawell-developedinterpretationofchildren’s right to play. Article 31 of the UNCRC (1989) as elaborated in GeneralComment17(UNCRC,2013),is,inessence,anauthoritative,relatablepolicynarrative,whichtheplayworkcommunity,havingbeeninthevanguardoftheadvocacyfor it, isuniquelyplacedtointerpretfortheUKpolicycontext.Thefieldshouldorganiseitselftoproducesuchaninterpretationandbuildapolicy-influencingcampaignaroundit.3.ConsolidatearoundanewprofessionalbodyforplayworkIf theplayworknarrative isnot tobehijackedbyotheragendas in its transition fromstorytelling topolicymaking, itwill needa custodian. In the sameway thatanauthor

29

must copyright theirwork, the playwork communitymust take ownership of its ownmaterialandberesponsibleforhowitisarticulatedandpurveyed.Ourhistorytellsusthat we cannot rely on even seemingly natural allies to make our judgments for usaboutwheretocompromiseandwheretostandonprincipleintheadvocacyprocess.We must adopt our own vehicle for this and then support it, use it and hold itaccountable7.4.ReviewplayworktrainingandqualificationsandtheirinfrastructureOnceournarrativeisagreedandourrepresentativebodyisinplaceandfitforpurpose,playwork should review its training and qualifications landscape, engaging withemployers,governmentandaccreditingbodiestoestablishanappropriate frameworkinwhichtheultimatearbiterofwhatconstitutesplayworkpractice,howeverthepolicyandregulatorycontextmaychange,isdeterminedbytheprofessionitself.4.Renewalliancesfortherighttoplay With our narrative fully articulated and positioned within a widely recognised policycontext,andwithanascentprofessionalbodytofightourcorner,weshouldnotbeshyaboutmakingalliances,oldandnew,butbeclear-eyedaboutthem,andretaincontrolofourownstructuresandprocesses.Perhaps it is time to resurrect or reinvent the idea of a children’s play council (orperhaps councils, helping to form groups locally to advocate for their owncommunities). A regrouped playwork sector with its refreshed narrative andrepresentativebodyshouldbealeadingmemberofanyplaycoalition,buildingstrongerand more coordinated links with the different movements for street play, play inschoolsandchildfriendlycities,forexample,wherewehavemanynaturalallies.5.Buildanationalcampaign Thismeanshavingabold,clearandmandatedsetofpolicyasksthatemergenaturallyfromthenarrative–andsomeresourcestohone,amplifyandcommunicatethem–tocreateamanifesto.We can suggest some asks – cabinet level responsibility for national play policy; astatutory duty on local authorities tomaintain a fully funded and regularly reviewedlocal area play strategy based on an assessment of sufficiency (learning from the

7Oneofus,Voce,mustdeclareaninteresthere,asafoundingtrusteeofthePlayworkFoundation,whichaims,amongotherthings,tobuildaprofessionalbodyforplaywork.

30

experience of Wales); basic playwork training for teachers and Ofsted inspectors; areturntoaminimumlevelofplayworktrainingandqualifications forallout-of-schoolplayandcarestaff;ahypothecatedtaxonelectronicanddigitaltoysandmediatofundnewandexistingadventureplaygroundsandtrainingforplayworkers.Wecouldgoon,butthewaytobuildacampaignistofirstlistentothevoicesofthoseon the front-line, and in their communities. What do playworkers most need frompublic policy?Most importantly,what do children and their parentsmost need fromtheirlocalauthoritiestoimproveandenhancetheirplaylives,andhowcangovernmentpolicybesthelptoachieveit?These are the questions we should be asking now in order that our narrative isresponsive to the needs of our public. At the same time, let us continue to take ourpractice into the fertile ground of the awakening new politics and join our fellowdenizensinbuildingthenewworld.AdrianVoceandGordonSturrockJune2018

31

ReferencesAcosta,R,2012,AdvocacyNetworksThroughaMultidisciplinaryLens: ImplicationsforResearchAgendas,Voluntas,23:156–181APPG (The All Party Parliamentary Group on A Fit and Healthy Childhood), 2014,Healthypatternsforhealthyfamilies:Removingthehurdlestoahealthyfamily,London:TheAllPartyParliamentaryGrouponAFitandHealthyChildhoodBrown,F,2017,WhatIsUniqueaboutPlaywork?FollowuppapertopresentationgivenatthelaunchofthePlayworkFoundationon8thNovember2017.Leeds:LeedsBeckettUniversityCameron,D,2007,MakingBritainthebestplace intheworldforchildrentogrowup,speechtolaunchMoreBallGames:aConservativePartyPolicyReview,reportedbyTheGuardian,26MarchCommitteeontheRightsoftheChild(CRC),2013,Article31:Generalcommentno.17ontherightofthechildtorest,leisure,play,recreationalactivities,culturallifeandthearts, Adopted 17 April 2013, available from: www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/docs/GC/CRC-C-GC-17_en.docCorbyn,J,2015,It'sachild'srighttoplayandthat'swhyyoungpeopleloseunderTories.ArticleinSundayMirror,5September,2015accessed18June2018at:https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/its-childs-right-play-thats-6389742CRAE, Children’s Rights Alliance for England, 2015, UK implementation of theConventionOnTheRightsOfTheChild:CivilsocietyalternativereporttotheCommitteeontheRightsoftheChild,England,London:CRAEClegg,N,2010,Supporting familiesandchildren:speechtoBarnardo’sconference,17June,London:TheLiberalDemocraticPartyChildren’s Rights Alliance for England (CRAE), 2015, UK implementation of theConventionOnTheRightsOfTheChild:CivilsocietyalternativereporttotheCommitteeontheRightsoftheChild,England,London:CRAECole-Hamilton,I,andGill,T,2002,Makingthecaseforplay,London:Children’sPlayCouncilCranwell,K,2003,‘TowardsPlaywork:anhistoricalintroductiontochildren’sout-of-schoolplayorganizationsinLondon’(1860-1940),inBrown,F(ed)Playwork:Theoryandpractice,Buckingham:OpenUniversityPressCRC,CommitteeontheRightsoftheChild,2013,Article31:Generalcommentno.17ontherightofthechildtorest,leisure,play,recreationalactivities,culturallifeandthearts,Adopted17April2013,accessedfrom

32

www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/docs/GC/CRC-C-GC-17_en.doc,May2018.Crotty,M. (1998)The foundations of social research:Meaning and perspective in theresearchprocess,(pp.1-17),London:SageCrow,D.andJones,M,2018,Narrativesastoolsforinfluencingpolicychange,Policy&Politics,vol.46,no2,217–34.Damasio,A,2018,TheStrangeOrderofThings,life,feelingandthemakingofcultures.London:PenguinRandomHouseGill,T,2014,Theplayreturn:Areviewofthewiderimpactofplayinitiatives,London:Children’sPlayPolicyForumHill,M,2005,ThePublicPolicyProcess,4thedition,Harlow:PearsonEducationLtd.Hughes, B, 2001, Evolutionary Playwork and Reflective Analytic Practice, London:Routledge.Kane, P, 2004, The play ethic: A manifesto for a different way of living, London:MacmillanLammy, D, 2007,Making Space for Children: the big challenge for our public realm,London: Compass, accessed on-line, 18 June 2018, at https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/making-space-for-children-the-big-challenge-for-our-public-realmLester,SandRussell,W,2008,Playforachange,play,policyandpractice:Areviewofcontemporaryperspectives,London:PlayEnglandLester, S and Russell, W, 2010, Children’s right to play: an examination of theimportanceofplayinthelivesofchildrenworldwide,WorkingpapersinEarlyChildhoodDevelopment,57,TheHague:BernardVanLeerFoundationNewstead,S,2015,Thepast,presentandfutureofplayworktraining?IntheJournalofPlayworkPractice,Vol.2,no1:61–64,Bristol:PolicyPress.Mayor of London, 2004, Making London better for all children and young people,London:GreaterLondonAuthorityNewstead,S,2015,AResponsetotheReviewoftheNationalOccupationalStandardsfor Playwork, Common Threads web blog, October 2015, republished and accessedfromwww.playworkfoundation.org,June,2018Pilling,D,2018,TheGrowthDelusion:Wealth,PovertyandtheWell-BeingofNations.London:BloomsburyPSG,PlayworkPrinciplesScrutinyGroup,2005,ThePlayworkPrinciples,Cardiff:PSG

33

Raworth K, 2017, Doughnut Economics: Seven ways to think like a 21st CenturyEconomist,London:RandomHouseBusinessRussell,W, 2013,Towardsa spatial theoryof playwork:what can Lefebvreoffer as aresponse toplaywork's inherent contradictions? InRyall, E,Russell,W,&MacLean,M(eds)2013,ThePhilosophyofPlay,Routledge,London.Shackell,A,Butler,N,Doyle,PandBall,D,2008,Design forplay:Aguide to creatingsuccessfulplayspaces,London:DCSF/PlayEnglandStanding,G,2014,APrecariatCharter,fromdenizenstocitizens,London:BloomsburySturrock,GandElse,P,1998,ThePlaygroundasTherapeuticSpace:Playworkashealing.“TheColoradoPaper”,InSturrock,G.andElse,P.(2005)TherapeuticPlayworkReaderl,Sheffield:LudemosAssociatesWelshAssemblyGovernment,2002,Playpolicy,Cardiff:CrowncopyrightWelshGovernment,2011,TheRightsofChildrenandYoungPersons(Wales)Measure,Cardiff:WelshGovernment