Public playgrounds have existed for little more than a century, yet their physical appearance has changed surprisingly little. Swings, slides, and climbing frames arranged on soft surfaces remain the dominant model in cities around the world. While these spaces are widely accepted as “safe,” they are often criticized for being repetitive, predictable, and limited in terms of creativity. This raises an important question: why do playgrounds still look the same despite decades of research on child development and play?
One key reason lies in the rise of risk-averse attitudes toward childhood. As Tim Gill explains in No Fear: Growing Up in a Risk-Averse Society, parents and institutions have increasingly prioritized supervision and risk elimination over children’s independent exploration (Gill, 2007). Concerns about injury and liability have led to strict safety standards, which strongly influence playground design. As a result, playgrounds became standardized environments optimized to minimize physical risk rather than to support imagination or curiosity.
Historically, early playgrounds were often supervised and included equipment that would be considered unacceptable today due to injury risks. However, from the mid-20th century onward, safety regulations and cost considerations encouraged uniform solutions. Impact-absorbing surfaces and fixed equipment became the norm, reinforcing a one-size-fits-all design approach. While research shows that the actual risk of serious injury in playgrounds is extremely low, fear continues to shape design decisions more than evidence does (Gill, 2007).
Another reason playgrounds remain unchanged is their adult-centered design process. Children are rarely involved in early design stages, and decisions are typically made based on adult assumptions about safety, order, and control. Brown et al. (2021) highlight that many playgrounds are designed to meet regulatory and accessibility requirements but fail to consider how children actually experience play. This often results in environments that are inclusive in theory but limited in playful engagement.
The persistence of similar playground designs is therefore not due to a lack of alternatives, but to a system shaped by fear, regulation, and adult perspectives. Reimagining playgrounds requires shifting the focus from eliminating risk to designing meaningful play experiences, where creativity, curiosity, and social interaction are valued alongside safety. For designers, this opens an opportunity to rethink playgrounds not as fixed installations, but as dynamic environments that support children’s development in richer and more diverse ways.
References
[1] T. Gill, No Fear: Growing Up in a Risk-Averse Society. London, UK: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation, 2007.
[2] D. M. Y. Brown et al., “A Scoping Review of Evidence-Informed Recommendations for Designing Inclusive Playgrounds,” Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences, vol. 2, 2021.
[3] Future Foundation, Changing Patterns of Parental Time and Supervision, Report, 2006.
