JCS本刊論文 | 父母如何應(yīng)對(duì)高密度城市兒童戶外活動(dòng)困境：一項(xiàng)質(zhì)性探索

Welcome to follow

The Journal of Chinese Sociology

2025年11月3日，The Journal of Chinese Sociology（《中國(guó)社會(huì)學(xué)學(xué)刊》）上線文章Navigating challenges in allowing children’s outdoor activities in high-rise and high-density urban communities: a qualitative exploration of parental tactics（《父母如何應(yīng)對(duì)高密度城市兒童戶外活動(dòng)困境：一項(xiàng)質(zhì)性探索》）。

| 作者簡(jiǎn)介

伍唯

悉尼大學(xué)社會(huì)學(xué)系在讀博士生

主要研究方向：青少年社會(huì)學(xué)、個(gè)體化進(jìn)程與親密關(guān)系

王梓寧

新南威爾士大學(xué)環(huán)境專業(yè)榮譽(yù)學(xué)士

主要研究方向：建筑與城市研究

Abstract

The transition to high-rise, high-density urban communities in China presents distinct challenges for parents in facilitating children’s outdoor activities. This study examines the built environmental and social factors shaping parental decision-making and coping strategies in these urban settings. Drawing on in-depth interviews with eleven parents in Nanning, the findings reveal that while safety concerns, limited public space, and overcrowding pose obstacles, parents often adapt through flexible tactics such as scheduling adjustments, careful supervision, and social support networks. However, the primary challenges arise from social pressures, including social isolation, academic competition, community expectations, and gendered parenting roles. These social constraints influence parental decision-making, often surpassing concerns related to the built environment. To navigate these challenges, parents leverage support networks and adopt structured strategies to ensure their children’s outdoor engagement. This study highlights the intertwined influence of physical and social environments on parenting, emphasizing the need to recognize how urban spatial constraints interact with broader societal pressures. The findings contribute to understanding urban family life in high-density Chinese cities, shedding light on how parents negotiate structural limitations to facilitate children’s outdoor activities.

Keywords

High-density communities; Children’s outdoor play; Urban parenting strategies

Introduction

Outdoor activities are beneficial to children’s physical health, social skills, and emotional well-being (Frost and Sutterby 2017). However, there is a strong association between children’s opportunities to play outdoors and parental attitudes. Parental concerns and anxieties can detract from their decisions about outdoor activities for children, reducing opportunities for outdoor play. These worries often stem from societal and built environmental factors (Oliver et al. 2022). For instance, parental anxiety about the changing childhood norms and children’s safety issues regarding their outdoor activity space influence their decisions about when and where children’s outdoor activities occur. In turn, parents’ attitudes affect the extent to which children autonomously participate in outdoor activities (Valentine and McKendrck 1997).

In high-density urban environments, parental concerns that hinder opportunities for children’s outdoor activities are particularly pronounced. In Western cities, low-rise, naturalized suburban environments and segregated childcare spaces are often idealized as optimal settings for children’s development. In contrast, the needs of parenting families in high-rise and high-density urban communities are frequently overlooked, intensifying parental anxiety and disadvantaging both children and their parents (Jacobs 1961; Oliver et al. 2022). Research has revealed that children living in high-rise communities face limitations in their ability to engage in independent outdoor play and interact with their playmates, compared to those in low-rise communities (Bengtsson 1974; Oliver et al. 2022). Many scholars have recognized this issue, with numerous studies exploring the urban rights of children and parenting families in high-density cities (Clements 2004; Pynn et al. 2018; Randolph 2006; Staempfli 2009). Nevertheless, most studies focus on Western countries. Meanwhile, research on the urban rights of children and parenting families in high-density communities under China’s unique urbanization process remains limited (Karsten 2014).

Since the 1970s, high-density communities of high-rise buildings have increasingly replaced low-rise housing in Chinese cities due to restrictions on land resources (Liu 2006). Though children’s outdoor activities in these high-density urban communities are common (Bao et al. 2021; Huang et al. 2024; Zhang et al. 2023), they often face challenges such as limited activity space, a lack of facilities, traffic hazards, and distrust in interpersonal relationships (Yang et al. 2023). Issues such as traffic hazards and crowded spaces have also been revealed as factors contributing to parental concern and anxiety in Western studies (Valentine and McKendrick 1997), while the problems specific to Chinese parents and the tactics they employ to address the difficulties of children’s outdoor activities remain largely unexplored. Obviously, research on this topic should integrate both the built environment’s impact and social factors.

Regarding social change, the predominance of nuclear family structures in urban China (Hu and Peng 2015) has left many dual-income households struggling to balance work and childcare responsibilities (Hong and Zhu 2020). These families face mounting challenges in managing childcare, and they are neighborhooded by societal pressures such as academic competition and high expectations for scholastic performance (Shen 2019; Chen et al. 2021). These challenges are acute in high-density, high-rise communities, where limited outdoor space, safety concerns, and fragmented social networks create multiple obstacles for parents. Despite the ubiquity of urban forms, and though many studies have identified their effects on children, little research has explored how these pressures interact to collectively influence parental decision-making, particularly about children’s outdoor activities.

Existing research on children’s outdoor activities in high-rise, high-density urban environments has largely focused on physical constraints such as limited play space, safety concerns, and spatial restrictions or parental anxieties related to child safety. While studies have examined how urban design and environmental limitations affect children’s outdoor play, they have insufficiently explored how parents respond to these challenges in their decision-making. At the same time, social constraints such as academic pressure, community expectations, and shifting family structures have been acknowledged as influential in shaping childhood experiences. Yet, their roles in parental decision-making regarding outdoor play remain underexplored. While these environmental and social factors can independently limit children’s outdoor activities, little research has examined how parents consider them together when choosing their children’s play opportunities. To better understand parental decision-making in these contexts, this study examines how parents perceive both spatial and social constraints, how these concerns shape their choices regarding outdoor play, and what strategies they develop to manage these limitations. By focusing on parental responses within high-rise, high-density urban communities in China, this study provides insights into how urban environments influence contemporary parenting practices and children’s outdoor engagement.

Literature review

Research has shown that outdoor play allows children to explore their environment and maintain their physical health. It also promotes social interactions, and the development of useful social skills such as cooperation, negotiation, and conflict resolution (Fj?rtoft and Sageie 2001; Frost and Sutterby 2017; Janssen and LeBlanc 2010). Interactions with the environment during outdoor play stimulate curiosity and creativity, providing opportunities for imaginative play and experiential learning (Ginsburg 2007). Outdoor activities are often considered a form of unstructured play involving risk-taking, allowing children to take risks and make decisions, and fostering their independence and resilience, while also posing safety risks (Little and Wyver 2008).

Parental involvement ensures children’s regular opportunities for unstructured outdoor play and mitigates safety risks. Parents who encourage and participate in outdoor activities with their children enhance their engagement and enjoyment (Veitch et al. 2006). Parental attitudes and behaviors toward outdoor play are often shaped by parents’ perceptions of safety and the availability of suitable play environments. Studies have shown that parents who perceive their neighborhoods as safe and have access to parks and playgrounds are more likely to support their children’s outdoor activities (Timperio et al. 2004). Parental involvement can include direct participation, supervision, and provision of resources such as toys and sports equipment, as well as modeling active and healthy behaviors for their children (Sallis et al. 2000). The role of parental involvement in reproducing social spaces for children’s outdoor activities has also been discussed in the context of social capital and community engagement (Holt et al. 2013).

Despite this, the rapidly urbanizing landscapes and the proliferation of high-rise, high-density urban communities have profoundly impacted children’s outdoor activities. Rhonda Clements (2004) and Marianne Staempfli (2009) identified a global decline in children’s engagement with outdoor play, linking the trend to increased urbanization, safety concerns, and the growing appeal of digital media. Parental anxieties about urban outdoor safety have also emerged as both a response to and a contributing factor in the decline, further restricting children’s outdoor activities and shifting them toward increasingly structured, privatized, and closely supervised play environments (Pynn et al. 2018). Fears related to potential injury or abduction frequently led parents to impose strict limits on their children’s outdoor activities (Veitch et al. 2008). The anxieties are particularly acute in high-density urban communities, where environments are often perceived as inadequate for supporting children’s developmental and recreational needs (Pynn et al. 2018; Randolph 2006; Staempfli 2009).

Additionally, the limited availability of open spaces and playgrounds in high-rise residential complexes further restricts children’s outdoor activities (Yang et al. 2023). Traffic hazards, encounters with strangers, crowded play areas, and general safety concerns in high-density settings amplify parental anxiety (Oliver et al. 2022; Valentine and McKendrick 1997). Moreover, poorly designed pedestrian pathways, inadequate lighting, and a lack of surveillance in communal areas increase the risks associated with children’s play (Carver et al. 2008). Parents are also more likely to allow their children to play outdoors if they perceive their neighborhoods as safe, and if well-maintained, secure play areas are available (Timperio et al. 2004). Unfortunately, the built environment in high-density urban areas often fails to meet these criteria, heightening parental concerns and reducing outdoor play opportunities for children (Christian et al. 2015). Helen Woolley (2016) highlights the importance of thoughtfully designed public open spaces for children’s play, noting that such spaces are often absent in high-density areas.

Similar problem exists in China. As urbanization in China accelerates, driven by the need to optimize land use in densely populated cities, high-density and high-rise communities have become prominent features of urban landscapes (Liu 2006; Yang et al. 2022). The built environment in high-density areas is often designed to prioritize residential and commercial spaces over children’s recreational areas, leading to a scarcity of safe and accessible play spaces (Liu 2022). In this context, children’s outdoor activities in urban high-density communities face cognitive, physical, and mental health challenges (Bao et al. 2021). Furthermore, the communities’ designers and planners frequently overlook children’s needs for outdoor play spaces, reflecting a broader trend of space commercialization that prioritizes economic gains (Shen and Lu 2022). Moreover, studies in China have also identified that children’s activities in urban areas exhibit spillover effects, with enclosed areas not being the only spaces for children’s activities; diverse and engaging open spaces in high-density urban environments are equally important (Huang et al. 2024).

High-density urban communities are physical spaces which represent a range of living conditions that can shape both social interactions and parental decision-making. They include gated communities and open spaces such as streets and green areas. According to Ray Forrest and Ngai-Ming Yip (2007), the conditions often reflect the characteristics of the urban middle class in China, encompassing concerns about neighborhood relationships, community atmosphere, childcare issues, school selection, and social isolation. The communities are marked by a lack of close-knit ties and limited interactions among residents, leading to anonymity and diminished social support networks. The community atmosphere is frequently described as impersonal and fragmented, lacking the cohesive social fabric of more traditional or lower-density neighborhoods. Additionally, the high demand for quality childcare services and facilities, which are often insufficient, places extra stress on parents. Furthermore, social isolation is exacerbated by the physical design of high-rise buildings, which limits opportunities for casual social interactions and fosters a sense of detachment from the community.

Social expectations are rooted in China’s intense academic pressure, leading parents to maintain rigorous academic standards for their children. Academic demands often result in children spending free time in extracurricular tutoring rather than engaging in unstructured play. The prioritization of academic achievement motivates urban families to seek housing within the catchment areas of high-quality schools despite higher housing prices and even though they have no guaranteed access to superior public resources (Chen et al. 2021). In a community that emphasizes academic achievement and structured activities, parents are more likely to be influenced by their peers’ and community’s behaviors and expectations and feel compelled to conform to the norms, further restricting their children’s opportunities for unstructured outdoor play (Hays 1996). Conversely, in a community atmosphere where outdoor play is valued and supported, parents are more likely to encourage their children to engage in such activities (Veitch et al. 2006).

While extensive research has been conducted on the benefits of outdoor play for children’s development and the role of parental involvement, there is a notable gap in understanding how the unique challenges of high-density urban environments and their social factors affect parental decision-making. Previous studies have highlighted the importance of outdoor play and the influence of parental attitudes and behaviors (Fj?rtoft and Sageie 2001; Ginsburg 2007; Little and Wyver 2008), yet they often isolate the built environment or social factors when examining their impact on children’s outdoor activities. As such, they have inadequately addressed how urban living conditions, such as limited outdoor space and safety concerns, shape parents’ tactics and decisions in these settings. This study addresses this gap by exploring parents’ specific challenges in high-density urban environments and how they influence their decision-making processes regarding children’s outdoor activities.

Analytical framework

Michel De Certeau’s (1984) concept of spatial practice revolves around the idea that “space is a practiced place”. He differentiates between strategies and tactics: Strategies are institutional practices employed by governments, corporations, and urban planners to structure and control spaces. The strategies organize space by categorizing, dividing, and assigning various functions, thus providing an “official” guide on its usage (De Certeau 1984). In contrast, tactics are the adaptive and creative methods individuals use to navigate appropriate spaces within the constraints imposed by the strategies. De Certeau (1984) argues that people employ tactics to personalize and transform planned and designed urban spaces. Through their movements, individuals blur spatial boundaries, redefine the actual functions of spaces, and create personal narratives that can subvert the power symbols imposed on specific areas. This perspective underscores individuals’ agency in adapting to and negotiating the limitations and opportunities presented by the physical environment (Tables 1, 2).

Building on de Certeau’s emphasis on individual agency within structured spaces, relational sociology provides a complementary lens for examining how parenting practices are embedded in ongoing social relations and neighborhood interactions. Relational sociology emphasizes the importance of social interactions, networks, and norms in shaping individual behaviors and social outcomes (Emirbayer 1997). Social networks, which refer to the structure of relationships and interactions within a community, influence how individuals make decisions and interact within their social environments (Wellman 1979). Moreover, social norms—the shared expectations and rules within a community—guide behavior and shape parental perceptions of appropriate and safe outdoor activities for their children (Emirbayer 1997). The concept of embeddedness further emphasizes that social actions are rooted in networks of social relationships, making the social contexts indispensable factors in decision-making processes (Granovetter 1985; Wellman 1979).

Integrating de Certeau’s spatial practice with relational sociology provides a nuanced framework for analyzing how institutional planning, built environment constraints, and interpersonal parenting practices interact in high-rise, high-density urban communities. De Certeau’s framework distinguishes between the institutional strategies of governments, corporations, urban planners and the everyday micro-tactics of individuals. This spatial practice offers insight into how institutional strategies, such as urban planning and design, shape and control the built environment, thereby influencing parents’ decisions regarding their children’s outdoor activities (De Certeau 1984). Yet, the influence is not exerted in isolation; rather, it interacts with the social structures emphasized in relational sociology. Parents’ tactics for navigating the spaces are often shaped by their social networks and norms. For instance, the decision to allow children to play in certain areas may hinge not only on the physical layout of the space, but also on the collective understanding and social agreements within the community about the use of that space. Relational sociology complements the analysis by revealing the social factors parents face alongside spatial constraints (Emirbayer 1997). In high-rise, high-density communities, the strategies imposed by urban planners are continuously negotiated through social interactions. Parents may collectively reinterpret these spaces, creating new, socially driven norms that reflect spatial constraints and community values.

Moreover, spatial practice is intertwined with spaces’ affordances for children’s play and parental supervision. Affordance, a concept introduced by psychologist James J. Gibson (1979), refers to the specific actions or uses that an object or environmental configuration allows based on its physical characteristics and the user’s abilities to interact with it. Since spatial affordances offer possibilities that transcend the designated functions of a space, they enable users to deploy micro-tactics in ways that differ from the space’s intended institutional strategies. Therefore, addressing the dynamic, diverse, and creative nature of outdoor play spaces for children requires an additional focus on affordance theory as a comprehensive supplement to De Certeau’s theory of tactics.

The integrated approach illustrates how community norms, neighbor relationships, social interactions, and spatial configurations interact with spatial elements to shape parental tactics. Thus, parents’ decisions are embedded in the dynamic interaction between the spatial strategies imposed by institutions and the social tactics developed within a community. By understanding this interaction, we can better comprehend how parents in these environments balance spatial limitations with social opportunities to meet their children’s needs.

Therefore, this paper begins with an analysis of developers’ strategies and how they structure and control communal spaces in high-rise, high-density communities. Then, it explores the environmental and social factors which influence parental decision-making. The core of the paper focuses on how parents employ tactics to navigate and adapt structured spaces for their children’s outdoor activities. Finally, insights from these theoretical perspectives are synthesized, offering a comprehensive understanding of the interplay between social and spatial factors in parental decision-making.

Methodology

We employed in-depth interviews to examine factors influencing parents’ decision-making regarding children’s outdoor activities. The interviews enabled detailed data collection for understanding parents’ thoughts and feelings (Ritchie and Lewis 2013), focusing on four main areas: built-environment challenges, social relationship concerns, decision-making about children’s outdoor time and location, and personal perceptions of challenges.

Existing research has indicated that the built environment influences both children’s activities and parental concerns. A well-designed play space can enhance children’s activities while alleviating parental concerns (Timperio et al. 2004; Woolley 2016). Conversely, the absence of such spaces may heighten parental anxiety (Clements 2004; Staempfli 2009). Dedicated children’s play facilities are not universally available in China’s dense urban communities. Instead, many such communities consist primarily of older residential developments not originally designed with child-friendly spaces in mind. If the conclusions of previous research hold, then the presence or absence of dedicated children’s facilities should have an impact on the parental concerns examined in this study.

Beyond the built environment, we also question whether other factors may influence parental decision-making regarding children’s outdoor activities. For instance, previous studies have highlighted that commercial xiaoqu (小區(qū), commercial residential housing communities), which emerged in the wake of housing privatization in the 1990s, often lack strong social ties (Forrest and Yip 2007). Residents typically come from diverse backgrounds and lack prior social connections, resulting in weaker neighborly relationships and more individualistic social interactions (Tomba 2014). In contrast, older residential areas such as the residential areas of danwei (work-unit communities) historically fostered strong social networks due to shared workplaces, long-term residential stability, and collective welfare services. These structural factors facilitated frequent interactions, mutual trust, and close-knit neighborly relations, creating an environment where informal childcare support and community-based supervision were common practices (Bray 2005).

Given these distinctions, we examine two high-rise, high-density communities that differ both in their built environment and in their social characteristics. These two urban communities incorporate factors identified in the literature review as potentially influencing children’s activities and the challenges parents face in child-rearing. These factors can be divided along two main dimensions. The first dimension concerns the physical attributes of the built environment, such as whether there are spaces specifically designed for children’s play, and whether pedestrian and vehicular traffic are separated. The second dimension involves social characteristics, including the quality of neighborhood relationships and the broader community atmosphere.

This study focuses on two communities, anonymized as Community A and Community B, in Qingxiu District, Nanning, Guangxi. As this region ranks near the median on most urban economic development indicators, it serves as a representative case study for urban China.

Community A is a high-rise and high-density commercial xiaoqu which was built in 2009. With twelve 30-storey super high-rise buildings, as well as a floor area ratio of 1: 5.5 and a total capacity of 2611 households, this community qualifies as a high-density and high-rise residential area. Community A features modern facilities including internal roads with pedestrian-vehicle separation, fitness equipment, child-friendly playgrounds, and underground parking. This community is also equipped with access control systems and is operated and maintained by a dedicated property management company. Most of the homeowners in this community have incomes high enough to afford housing at the average market price level (in 2022, housing prices in this community ranged between 14,000 and 16,000 RMB per square meter, aligning with the regional median). These residents come from diverse social backgrounds and often lack pre-existing social connections.

Community B is a high-rise and high-density residential section within a danwei xiaoqu (work-unit residential community). It comprises 15 buildings that were built to accommodate employees of a state-owned enterprise. Three of these buildings were constructed in the 1970s and 1980s, while the remaining twelve were built in the 1990s. These buildings consist of eight stories, and their total height exceeds 27 m. This community has a floor area ratio of 2.3, which qualifies it as a high-density residential area according to the standards set by the Ministry of Housing and Urban–Rural Development of China (GB50180-2018). Community B is equipped with basic public amenities such as green space, a basketball court, and fitness equipment. It also has an access control system, with surveillance cameras installed and maintained by property management. However, it has neither a designated playground for children nor pedestrian-vehicle separation. Due to its age and limited facilities, housing prices in this area are below average for the area in which this community is located. In 2022, second-hand housing prices were approximately 9000–10,000 RMB per square meter. Most residents are either current or retired employees of the state-owned enterprise, and many have remained in the area due to their careers, maintaining long-standing workplace-based social ties.

We used purposive sampling to target families with school-age children living in these communities. Initial participants were recruited through researchers’ connections in both communities, followed by snowball sampling through recruitment letters. Data collection took place between September and October 2023. We interviewed 11 participants (six from Community A and five from Community) until data saturation was achieved. We assigned codes to participants based on their community and interview sequence. Interviewees from Community A are labeled A-1 through A-6, while those from Community B are labeled B-1 through B-5. These codes are used in the findings and discussion sections when referencing specific individuals’ experiences.

The interviews, each lasting thirty to sixty minutes, were transcribed following inter-textual coherence principles. Analysis followed Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis approach, proceeding through familiarization, coding, theme development, and review stages. The coding process began with identifying key terms and patterns, such as “safety concerns,” “activity space accessibility,” and “parental supervision.” These initial codes were then clustered into broader themes, for example, combining “safety concerns” and “activity space accessibility” into “environmental safety concerns.”

Through iterative refinement, 20 themes emerged: eight articulating factors and concerns affecting children’s outdoor play, and twelve outlining parental tactics for addressing challenges. The reliability was enhanced through detailed descriptions and direct quotations (Lincoln and Guba 1985). As native researchers from Nanning, the team employed several strategies to mitigate potential bias, including maintaining reflexive journals, conducting peer debriefing sessions, and implementing member checking where participants reviewed data interpretations (Berger 2015; Corbin and Strauss 2015). These measures ensured that findings accurately reflected participants’ experiences while minimizing potential bias due to the researchers’ local familiarity.

Findings

Parental concerns

regarding the built environment

In both high-rise, high-density communities, parents expressed positive attitudes toward their children playing outside. However, parents still have several concerns when making decisions about their children’s outdoor activities. These concerns include safety risks, disruptions to the community atmosphere, spatial crowding, and security issues, highlighting the limitations of formal spatial planning in addressing parental needs.

The primary concern among parents is the safety risks associated with spillover effects (Huang et al. 2024), wherein children’s play unintentionally extends beyond designated areas, increasing the likelihood of traffic-related hazards. In Community B, the absence of clear separation between pedestrian and vehicular spaces results in shared roads, presenting challenges to children’s safety. Parents frequently voiced concerns about accidents occurring when children would chase balls, run onto roads, or extend their play into traffic zones. Contrary to the assumption of this study that playgrounds specifically designed for children would facilitate parenting practices, the findings reveal that even in a community with dedicated children’s playgrounds like Community A, spillover effects persist due to the inability to spatially confine children’s activities. Games such as tag and ball games often lead children into adjacent spaces, causing spillover effects where they venture beyond playground boundaries into areas with complex terrain or a concentration of elderly residents. Parents worry that children may fall and injure themselves or accidentally collide with elderly individuals. Spillover effects fuel parental anxiety by forcing parents to further divide their attention in monitoring their children’s movements. As the number of children increases, parents’ limited attention makes it difficult to effectively supervise and promptly intervene when children stray beyond designated safe zones.

Moreover, parents expressed concerns that children’s unstructured play disrupts neighborly relations and the built environment. Children’s use of space is sometimes linked to their imagination, which can lead to behaviors that are destructive to the environment (Hadfield-Hill and Zara 2019; Punch 2000). One parent described a case that children had scattered sand into elevators, disrupting the living experience of other residents. Another recalled that her son had pulled down a palm leaf to splash water and almost hit a passerby, requiring her to apologize to the affected neighbor. Parents feel responsible for mediating these conflicts and ensuring that their children’s behavior aligns with informal social norms which emphasize quiet and orderly public spaces. Although Helen Little and Shirley Wyver (2008) suggest that children need open play areas, parents living in high-density urban housing struggle with shared community spaces, where unstructured play often clashes with the expectations of adult residents. Many parents try to comply with social norms but they find it difficult to curb their children’s spontaneous activities in shared spaces.

Parents are also concerned about spatial crowding and competition for public space. They reported that adults without children often occupy these areas, limiting children’s access. One parent (Interviewee A-5) noted that adults frequently use basketball courts, making it difficult for children to play. Public spaces have also become fragmented by competing interests, reducing their function as shared environments (Mela 2014). In Community A, purpose-built play spaces with facilities like swings and slides attract children from neighboring communities, increasing congestion. A parent living in Community A (Interviewee A-4) mentioned that some parents from nearby communities that lack safe play spaces often bring their children to Community A when acquaintances living there provide them with access. This practice has contributed to overcrowding in Community A and has made it increasingly difficult for local parents to find accessible play spaces near their own residences.

Many parents lack confidence in community surveillance and security measures, particularly due to insufficient monitoring in high-use areas. Spaces such as playgrounds and walking paths often lack proper surveillance, making it difficult for parents to remotely monitor children and respond to security risks. A monitoring system had been implemented to help parents supervise children remotely and identify security threats. Parents also emphasized the need for additional safety measures, such as neighborhood patrols, more professional access control systems, and emergency call equipment, to increase confidence in security. Inconsistencies in gatekeeper security policies caused additional concern. Some parents allow children to leave the community freely, while others strictly enforce supervision rules, making security measures unreliable. The lack of standardized procedures reduces parental trust in the community’s ability to ensure a controlled and safe environment for children.

Social challenges

faced by parents

The conclusions of existing studies suggest that urban communities with modern infrastructure, such as access control systems, playgrounds, and green spaces, are designed to encourage children’s outdoor activities (Shamsuddin et al. 2014). However, we found that children in Community A did not necessarily spend more time outdoors than those in Community B. Our interviews revealed that despite differences in physical infrastructure, both communities face similar social challenges, including parents’ safety concerns, academic pressure, and limited opportunities for unstructured play.

Social isolation is a common challenge for parents in high-density urban communities, who often describe difficulties in establishing meaningful social connections. One mother (Interview A-5) shared: “He doesn’t really have friends here; everyone stays at home…h(huán)is childhood friends live far away.” Robert Putnam (2000) argues that this fragmentation reflects a broader decline in social capital, where privatized living arrangements reduce opportunities for informal community networks. Weakened community ties are particularly detrimental to children, as their social development relies on informal neighborhood interactions (Baum and Palmer 2002). Isolation stems from both individual behaviors and urban planning. In commercial housing communities, exclusivity is prioritized, with an emphasis on private residences over shared public spaces, further limiting opportunities for social interaction (Lees et al. 2008). The commodification of housing deepens this isolation, weakening the social frameworks necessary for community building (Harvey 2012). As a result, parents must establish social networks independently, often without the structural support once provided by collective neighborhood systems.

In contrast, Community B has historically fostered stronger social connections, not only among adults but also among children. Parents recalled how most residents had previously worked together, forging long-term relationships that extended beyond the workplace and into residential life. Because of these close social ties, children inherited their parents’ social networks, meaning they had pre-established connections with other children in the community. These pre-established networks facilitated spontaneous neighborhood play, as children were already familiar with one another through their parents’ workplace-based relationships. However, parents noted that aging infrastructure and the relocation of many of the original residents had diminished the atmosphere for children’s play over time. The shift toward privatized housing policies has further weakened collective systems, replacing them with fragmented spaces that prioritize individualized living over shared infrastructure (Logan 2012). The decline of workplace-based residential networks has reduced children’s opportunities for spontaneous outdoor play, making social isolation a growing issue in both environments. Parents in both settings must now cultivate social interactions for their children, compensating for the loss of inherited social connections and informal neighborhood engagement.

Social norms in urban communities often compel parents to adopt cautious practices to their children’s outdoor activities. While Communities A and B impose different forms of regulation, both environments ultimately shape parental decisions in ways that limit unstructured outdoor play. In Community B, established social norms emphasize quietness and order, influencing how parents manage children’s activities. The older buildings with poor sound insulation mean that even moderate noise carries easily between apartments, leading to tension over acceptable behavior in shared spaces. One parent described the resulting pressure:

There is an unwritten rule in our building that children cannot be too noisy outside. Otherwise, neighbors will complain, so we dare not let our children play downstairs. Moreover, parents in our community expect their children to do homework at home after school or attend extracurricular classes, rather than playing in the open public spaces of the community. As a result, my child had no other kids in the neighborhood to play with, and I felt a lot of pressure. So, I enrolled my child in an extracurricular class, hoping he could make friends with other children (Interviewee B-1).

These unwritten expectations emerge from shared relations, where communal norms are reinforced through repeated interactions. Over time, these norms create a self-perpetuating cycle in which parents preemptively restrict children’s outdoor play to avoid social conflict, further normalizing indoor and structured activities over free play.

Meanwhile, Community A regulates outdoor play through spatial tension rather than communal expectations. Unlike Community B, where behavioral norms are collectively enforced, Community A lacks a shared regulatory framework for children’s outdoor activities, leading to frequent disputes over where and how children should play. Interviewee A-4 described the resulting conflict: “There are many people here, and when there are many people, it is possible to have conflict, especially among children. They often play in others’ areas.” These tensions illustrate how privatized urban spaces shape social interactions (Harvey 2007), emphasizing controlled access over communal needs (Atkinson and Blandy 2005). While newer buildings have better sound insulation, conflict over space usage persists. Children’s play frequently overlaps with adult activities, forcing ongoing negotiations over space that often disadvantage children. As a result, parents must navigate fragmented and exclusionary environments where competition over space leads to recurring disputes.

Despite differences in how these urban communities impose restrictions, the end result is the same—parents in both settings feel compelled to regulate children’s outdoor play to maintain social harmony and avoid potential conflict.

While the two communities differ in how social relationships are formed and maintained, the balance between academic demands and outdoor play remains a shared constraint on children’s outdoor activities across both settings. Many families reported that homework and extracurricular demands had limited their children’s outdoor activity time. One parent explained:

What can you do when there’s so much homework to finish? There’s no time to play. They can play anytime in the future; studying is more important at this stage. I want my child to go out and play more, but where is he supposed to find the time? After beginning elementary school, there are extracurricular classes every day. He goes to bed soon after finishing homework. If my child does not complete his homework, he cannot go out to play and will not get any exercise (Interviewee A-3).

This tension reflects broader cultural and structural forces that shape urban parenting practices. Stephen J. Ball (2012) critiques neoliberal education systems for narrowly defining success through academic achievement, often at the expense of holistic development. Similarly, Lia Karsten (2014) observes that urban parenting cultures internalize social pressures, prioritizing measurable academic outcomes over recreation and well-being. Our study supports Karsten’s findings, illustrating how competitive educational environments intersect with spatial and temporal constraints to prioritize structured activities over the developmental benefits of outdoor play, turning the play into a luxury rather than a necessity under such conditions.

Gendered caregiving roles also intensify the difficulties associated with facilitating children’s outdoor play in high-density urban environments across both environments. Mothers often bear the primary responsibility for organizing and supervising these activities, a role shaped by limited paternal involvement due to work commitments. One mother (Interviewee A-6) explained, “The father is usually busy with work, so the entire responsibility for the children’s play falls to me.” Such caregiving patterns reflect the persistent imbalance in domestic and childcare responsibilities, where women disproportionately shoulder domestic tasks alongside professional obligations (Hochschild and Machung 2012). Cultural norms and policy frameworks entrench these roles by individualizing caregiving and perpetuating traditional family structures (Doucet 2015). As a result, mothers often struggle to balance competing demands, leaving less time and energy to support unstructured outdoor play. This also limits children’s outdoor experiences and downplays fathers’ unique contributions to their development (Lamb 2010).

Navigating urban parenting:

a tale of community,

tactics, and social networks

While the two selected communities differ in spatial layout and social organization, they impose comparable constraints on children’s independent activities. In both settings, parents must navigate concerns around safety, limited open space, social expectations, and academic pressure. In response to these constraints, parents across both communities adopt similar adaptive strategies, such as adjusting daily routines, coordinating supervision, and establishing informal play spaces.

However, these shared strategies emerge from different social conditions. In Community B, although the residential networks once sustained by the workplace-based danwei system have weakened, many residents remain long-term neighbors; residual social familiarity and shared history persist. These residual connections offer a loose but still functional basis for parental coordination. In contrast, Community A comprises residents without prior affiliations, requiring parents to cultivate cooperative relationships through repeated interaction and selective trust-building. Although the scale and ease of coordination differ, parents in both communities draw on available social resources to manage everyday challenges. These tactics reflect context-specific adaptations to a shared urban condition.

Among these tactics, parents in high-density communities employ sophisticated micro-tactics to mitigate limitations in the built environment, establishing informal well-lit play zones. These populated areas extend to boundaries marked by environmental features like manhole covers, flower beds, and building entrances in older neighborhoods, or symbolic landmarks like pavilion corners and elevated plaza edges in newer developments (Lynch 1960). “Isomorphic spatial patterns” demonstrate parents’ agency in reconfiguring urban spaces, leveraging what Jane Jacobs (1961) termed “eyes on the street”—the informal surveillance from passersby that supplements parental supervision. Parents strategically position themselves at elevated “viewing stands” with unobstructed sightlines, adopting boundary positions for structured activities like basketball, or central positions for activities requiring closer monitoring. In this way, parents dynamically adjust zones based on safety considerations and children’s needs. When community spaces lack adequate monitoring and children’s play leads to spillover effects, such as crossing boundaries or venturing into dangerous areas, the demands of parental supervision may be mitigated by the attention of bystanders, who act as a final line of defense. As Interviewee B-1 noted, her anxiety about the risks associated with outdoor play diminished after observing concerned residents intervening to prevent children from running into parking lots, illustrating how community vigilance functions as an additional safety layer. Parents deliberately selecting spaces with high visibility and pedestrian traffic create multi-layered supervision mechanisms that compensate for risks inherent to high-density urban environments, especially in older communities lacking pedestrian-vehicle separation.

Spatial reconfiguration exemplifies De Certeau’s (1984) concept of tactical adaptation, where public spaces are actively reclaimed and repurposed rather than passively accepted as designed. Parents create informal systems consisting of bright core zones, clearly defined boundaries, and strategic supervision points. This strategy deviates from the traditional fixed play spaces that rarely accommodate the complex realities of children’s spontaneous play. Notably, parents often avoid areas specifically designed for children with poor lighting in favor of spaces better meeting their criteria for visibility and safety. This action demonstrates how actual use patterns may contradict planning intentions. Research findings challenge conventional urban planning approaches that emphasize fixed-function spaces, suggesting the need for adaptable environments that support parents’ supervisory practices in high-density settings instead. When parents recognize that urban environments lack sufficient residential play areas, they adaptively incorporate spaces that meet their criteria into their children’s daily activities, effectively negotiating constraints imposed by the physical environment. The deliberate organization of informal play configurations shows how parents’ micro-practices constitute a form of spatial resistance to urban limitations, actively transforming potentially unsafe or inadequate environments into viable play spaces through collective adaptations. The process of spatial negotiation highlights the dynamic relationships between institutional strategies (formal planning) and everyday tactics (parental adaptations), revealing how spaces become meaningful through use rather than designation alone.

The spatial micro-tactics are reinforced through rules and risk-awareness education. Parents often adopt proactive measures, such as offering prompts and guidance to prevent potential issues (Austin et al. 2023). As Interviewee A-4 described, “We tell children they can play between the two big trees and the flower bed, making sure they understand these are the ‘safe zones’ away from cars.” Moreover, proactive measures extend beyond safety to incorporate social norms, aiming to maintain harmonious neighborhood relations and address spatial competition. For instance, parents often adhere to unwritten rules discouraging noise, especially in buildings with poor sound insulation. Interviewee B-1 explained, “If our children are too noisy outside at night, neighbors will complain, so we ask them to stay quiet and avoid playing in these areas.” These informal agreements among neighbors allocate play areas or times to balance different residents’ needs. As relational sociology emphasizes (Emirbayer 1997), such interactions build networks of trust and cooperation, creating a sense of shared ownership over public spaces. By teaching children to respect shared spaces and adhere to social norms, whether about noise levels or communal property care, parents help their children develop skills for successful outdoor play while maintaining positive community relations.

However, even with these efforts, the practical challenges of supervising children’s outdoor activities persist. Even when safety rules are established, children might still need supervision while playing. At the same time, parents often face the challenge of balancing work, household duties, and childcare (Meyers 2004). In such situations, our interviews revealed that parents often mobilize social capital to help supervise their children’s outdoor activities. Social capital, a concept introduced by Pierre Bourdieu (1986), refers to the aggregate of the actual or potential resources linked to possessing a durable network of institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance and recognition. Social capital includes bonding, bridging, and linking capital. Bonding capital refers to resources accessed through close-knit relationships such as family and close friends. Bridging capital refers to resources available through more distant connections, such as acquaintances or colleagues. Linking capital involves relationships with institutions and individuals in positions of power, providing access to resources beyond the immediate community (Putnam 2000; Woolcock 2001). The forms of social capital are interconnected and collectively contribute to the social support network available to individuals.

Parents often incorporate extended family members into their support systems. Four interviewees (A-1, A-5, B-2, B-3) mentioned that due to their busy work schedules, they had invited their (or their partner’s) parents (i.e., children’s grandparents) to help care for their children. Grandparents can temporarily substitute for parents during children’s play, providing supervision and alleviating parents’ childcare responsibilities, thereby giving children more opportunities to play. This multi-generational support provides parents and children with both emotional and practical assistance (Hayslip and Kaminski 2005).

In families without extended family support, parents build or join social networks in the community to cope with the dilemma of having no one to supervise their children while they play outdoors. In both communities, parents fostered a network of shared responsibilities that extended the boundaries of familial oversight, where trust and mutual aid allowed for a collective approach to childcare. Interviewee A-2 shared, “I know many parents in the community. We have a WeChat group; sometimes, we arrange for the kids to play together. If someone doesn’t have time to supervise their child, we also help take care of each other,” which illustrates the strong communal bonds formed within the networks.

The ways parents connect within the communities also vary. Social relationships naturally emerge from pre-existing relationships in Community B, where parents are often colleagues or relatives. Their parent groups often consist of dozens of members, covering parents of children of various ages. In contrast, connections are purposefully developed among previously unconnected residents in Community A. Interviewee A-3 noted, their parent group chat had initially formed among several parents whose children were classmates and lived in the same community. The group gradually expanded to include parents from the same building or those with children of similar ages, but it remains small—usually around a dozen members. Despite the differences in scale, both types of networks facilitate close relationships through nearly daily interactions and mutual support, such as assisting with child supervision and coordinating outdoor activities.

Although these networks are capable of reversing neither the broader decline in everyday sociability nor the reduction in spontaneous outdoor play, they offer a cocoon of communal vigilance that eases the pressure on parents who cannot always directly supervise their children. Though modest in scale and scope, they enable more predictable and coordinated outdoor play by allowing parents to share supervision responsibilities. These small-scale arrangements also reduce children’s sense of isolation by ensuring regular interaction with peers. In both communities, parents use WeChat groups to schedule playdates, giving children opportunities to play together safely and maintain friendships. As one parent recounted:

A few of us parents who are familiar with each other regularly schedule playdates for the kids to go down (to play areas) together. The kids play in a safe area, and we watch over them together, and we can also chat. Other kids and their parents often join in as well (Interviewee B-5).

Jenny Veitch et al. (2006) emphasizes that regular interactions in familiar settings can foster a sense of belonging, which is beneficial for children’s well-being. Regular playdates are an ideal opportunity to cultivate community awareness. During these gatherings, children engage in ongoing social interactions, which helps avoid the pitfalls of social isolation. Additionally, they can build solid social networks by nurturing existing friendships and forming new ones. This approach provides an ideal solution where children can enjoy the benefits of socializing and outdoor activities while parents gain social support from the networks. Five of the parents mentioned they could seek advice on child-rearing, share experiences, and discuss challenges with other parents. Such interactions reflect the concept of “social contagion” (Christakis and Fowler 2012), where behaviors and attitudes within a network influence others. Parental networks illustrate how shared practices and mutual support can spread, fostering a cohesive and supportive environment for child-rearing.

Furthermore, parental networks can link to broader social networks and bond with other forms of social capital. For examples, parents sometimes seek for commercial organizations' help to facilitate children’s social activities, such as organizing field trips to parks or outdoor adventure activities. This collaboration enables the leveraging of external resources, known as bridging capital, to provide children with structured and supervised social opportunities (Putnam 2000). Beyond collaborating with commercial entities to enhance outdoor activities, parents also utilize linking capital, which involves relationships with institutions and authorities, to collectively petition property management to improve community safety (Woolcock 2001). They often submit joint requests to property management, who are responsible for maintaining and managing communal facilities, ensuring security, and providing essential services such as cleaning and waste removal. Parents request facility improvements, including security cameras, enhanced gate control, and more frequent security patrols to prevent intrusions by strangers and timely maintenance of the community environment, such as prompt cleaning of trash and debris to reduce safety hazards for children’s outdoor activities.

Additionally, many parents use child safety technologies. Seven interviewees mentioned equipping their children with smartwatches with GPS and communications features or smartphones to implement remote supervision and alleviate concerns about being unable to personally supervise their children.

Discussion:

parental tactics in

adapting urban play spaces

to the built environment

and social challenges

While Communities A and B differ in their spatial structures and community norms, the challenges parents face in facilitating children’s outdoor play in these two communities are remarkably similar. Although these constraints manifest differently in each setting, they ultimately lead to similar parental concerns over and restrictions on children’s outdoor play.

We posit that parents are not passive actors in children’s outdoor activities within high-density urban communities; rather they develop flexible and spontaneous tactics to adapt to their environments. Despite this, challenges rooted in social factors cannot be fully resolved through parents’ everyday practices, leading to ongoing parental concerns. In such circumstances, parental decision-making is more likely to be influenced by social factors than obstacles presented by the built environment.

Parents’ flexible tactics

in response to

the built environment challenges

The study reveals that parents in high-density urban environments employ sophisticated and interconnected tactics to address the challenges the built environment poses. Rather than being passive recipients of spatial constraints, parents actively transform and adapt spaces through creative micro-practices, effectively mitigating issues of limited public space, insufficient surveillance, and mixed-use traffic hazards. This demonstrates parents’ agency in shaping their environment to support children’s outdoor activities.

The way parents adapt community spaces for children’s play can be understood through De Certeau’s (1984) theory of spatial practice. De Certeau distinguishes between institutional strategies that create fixed spatial structures and users’ tactical responses to these structures. While urban planners and designers establish formal play spaces with predetermined functions, parents develop their own tactics to reimagine and repurpose these spaces. These parental adaptations also align with Gibson’s (1979) theory of affordances, which explains how environmental features offer possibilities for action beyond their intended purpose. While affordances in children’s outdoor play spaces have traditionally been understood primarily in terms of the equipment and sites designed for children’s play activities, parents’ actual use of these spaces reveals a more complex dynamic.

Facing safety concerns in community spaces, parents demonstrate these theoretical principles through specific tactical approaches that accommodate both their supervisory needs and children’s play requirements. These micro-tactical deployments involve parents proactively selecting zones within public spaces with three key features: a bright, highly visible central area, flexible boundaries adjusted according to site conditions, and designated rest areas for parental supervision. Through this approach, parents effectively manage the spillover effects of children’s play, demonstrating how they tactically reimagine and repurpose urban space. Parents seek out spaces that afford both supervision and safety. They value environments with enough open space for children to move and play freely, while also being safe, well-lit, and accessible. These features enable the effective implementation of their supervisory tactics.

Although these dynamically regulated and temporary spaces which parents and children jointly adjust are not necessarily anticipated in architectural design, they maintain the center, boundaries, and viewing areas necessitated by both micro-tactical needs and children’s play requirements. When spatial configurations incorporate these three characteristics, such as a spacious plaza with elevated steps as boundaries and flower beds that serve as seating areas for monitoring, they provide essential affordances for both parental supervision tactics and children’s play. The absence of such affordances in the built environment can intensify parental supervision concerns.

Ultimately, these parental tactics’ effectiveness in addressing built environmental challenges indicates that while physical infrastructure is important, users’ creative practices are also indispensable in shaping functional outdoor play spaces. Urban planners and policymakers should recognize residents’ flexible micro-practices, acknowledging that unforeseen creative reuses cannot be fully internalized during the design phase. These findings challenge traditional approaches to urban design that prioritize fixed solutions over adaptable spaces. Instead, it suggests that community spaces should facilitate the kind of tactical adaptation that parents naturally employ, providing features that can be flexibly repurposed to meet evolvin...