**3. Discussion**

Cavnar et al. [44] asserted that the quality of recreational facilities helps to create involvement in recreational activities in developed areas. Abdullah and Mohamad [45] also asserted that the quality of recreational facilities appeals to individuals to utilise them. Concerning the benefits of recreational facilities, the findings inferred those recreational facilities were of great significance to the social life of the residents. A similar research by Eigenschenk et al. [46] found that recreational facilities, most especially those related with outdoor recreation, have a high impact on the social life of a community. In addition to appropriateness [47] argued further that recreational areas are valued more for their benefits than for any other social environmental benefits, most especially the greens. With regards to the stakeholder's involvement **Table 2** shows the facilities depicting high proportion being privately owned and run at small scale with the few owned and by the agencies of the government are run at higher (Complex) level. This finding is liking to that of [48] who provided the impact of the stakeholders on the provision of recreational facilities in a community in terms of social integration. This involves and informs the appropriate stakeholders and decision makers in Salzburg that are already in the conceptual stage and contribute to the citizens' quality of life. In the same vein the study of [49] showed how knowledge, skills and values from other field of disciplines and active research are brought forth towards advancing the decision-making process in sports and recreational provisions. This involves the stakeholders in taken ownership of the plan outcome, which is different with the system in the Greater Jos where decision emanate from the government being the politicians. Therefore, the governments need to look beyond policies but lead in the provision of recreational facilities to meeting the need of the communities of the Greater Jos that now expands progressively from the core city of the two-local government of Jos-North and Jos-South to the other four local governments that now make up the Greater Jos.

This aim of the provision cannot be achieved when the government is lacklustre in this regard. This agrees with the findings of [50]. Their findings provide helpful information for planning in order to ensure an adequate recreational facility provision and, to eliminate environmental inequalities in Germany. They identified inequalities in the provision of the recreational facilities across German major cities and, relating that to the statistical analysis of the socio-economic background of households and individuals shows the differences in the provision to the income, age, education, and children.

The finding from the study identified weak government participation in the provision of recreational facilities which resulted to the inadequate number to meet the ever increase population and spatial spread. The government responsibility through the agencies are funding and provision of space and management. The finding from [51] figure out that there is a gross deficiency of recreational facilities which has denied urban dwellers from participating actively in recreational activities, hence, affecting the liveability of the city. This informed the recommendation for the establishment of an agency that takes on development and management of recreational facilities in the city. Thus, the need to set aside politics and ensure the radical intervention within the Greater Jos by politicians being the heads of the government to ensure proper policy implementation. Thus, complement the efforts of the private operators in the provision of capital, since the provision is capital intensive. This is similar also to [52]. He asserts that state and non-profits funds tend to favour middleincome communities and fail to equalise spending. Therefore, the suburbs with large minority populations, and low-income suffer from disadvantage of low expenditure.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.105608 Corporate Social Responsibility: A Case of the Provision of Recreational Facilities*

Government intervention in increased localization of service provision high distribution of resources for parks and recreation, for local populations as well. This disagrees with the findings of [53] whose statistical analysis indicated rejection of the hypothesis of proximity principle to recreational facility, contradicting the internationally accepted theory of paying more for visiting and using the facility when it is of distance, but that residents are willing to pay more for such facility in close proximity.

#### **3.1 Practical implications**

Though, the qualitative findings showed the weaknesses of the provision with regards to accessibility relating it to the immeasurable provision in consonant with the rate of development. This shows the bridge in the implementation of the policy and strategy as enshrined in the previous plans. Despite that, the benefit is the reformulation of policy and strategy from part of the solutions rendered by the informants. This is in view of developing synergy between the government and stakeholders in a bit to encourage the government to aid individuals and organisations to access funds and space with other basic facilities like water, electricity, good roads, and security.

#### **3.2 Relevance to public interest theory**

The public interest theory as discussed is based on assumption that, regulations are made by a government with the aim of taking full advantage of social welfare, and in this case in recreation activities. Here the provision of recreational facilities is dependent on the regulated provision of the facilities to meeting the desire of the participant. The recreational facilities are the same as any resource and said to be scarce in nature as well as being insufficient in provision. The resultant effects are the inadequacy in the provision to population threshold, appropriateness, and location.

Secondly, this study substantiates the claims of adherence to policy of the resources as one of the essential constructs as supported by [54] where provision of recreational facilities is dependent on policy regulation, hence the adequate provision. This is also to support the framework that stakeholders, private providers and agencies are also a determinant to the provision of recreational facilities, hence, the Corporate Social Responsibility.

#### **3.3 Study strengths**

Thirdly, the study provides valuable knowledge and suggestions on the stakeholders' involvement in view of the provision of recreational facilities. The stakeholders have a stake in the provision of the recreational facilities judging by the support of the empirical analysis, and which concerns both private and the MDAs. The information gathered from the interview reveals the role played by both, though on different level the circumstances are basically the same. The government agencies would find this study as essential means of information to apply for the way forward in the provision of recreational facilities, among such information is the support for the private providers to secure fund/capital to make easier the provision of the facilities, the management of the government owned recreational facilities be intensified to over-weigh the excessiveness of the operations of the private recreational to making profit, planning ahead to dealing with the incessant conversion of other land uses for recreational purposes, emphasis on bringing budget to reality that facilitates land compensation and obtaining sophisticated recreational

equipment equating to the contemporary statuses. and, to be a determinant and a force to relating to the government through the agencies the challenges from the perspective of the users and atmosphere for operation considering essential services that complement the provision of the recreational facilities.
