I think during a discussion here on HN, somebody posted a link to a study (or guidelines?) about safe playgrounds (I don't recall from which country).
IIRC the gist of the article was that playgrounds should always include risk elements because otherwise the children will use the playground against its design to find those risks (e.g. climb up on top of a structure which was designed that you play inside of it). The crucial element though was that risks should be calculatable and there should not be surprising dangerous outcomes.
I have to say looking at the playgrounds available to my kids here in Sweden, I'm pretty jealous of them, we didn't have such cool playgrounds available to us (or they were very rare). It is sometimes terrifying to watch as a parent, but look like great fun.
I remember this as well, the one I could quickly find was an NPR article[0].
The key difference between what you're mentioning and the article here is "buildable risk". i.e. the kids build the playground and it's age appropriate for their abilities.
The article, more the photos in the article, look like death traps at height. Even self-built playgrounds won't reach those crazy heights.
> IIRC the gist of the article was that playgrounds should always include risk elements because otherwise the children will use the playground against its design to find those risks
I have noticed exactly that again and again on playgrounds designed for very small children (<3). The older kids get bored and will just start to climb the playhouse roof, the swing, or the top of the tube slide.
Even 3-4 year old children will try to extend the play available by climbing up the slide in reverse, etc. I guess that's their version of climbing on the roof.
To keep the older kids interested, I try to find a way for them to play floor-is-lava and circumnavigate the equipment. Doesn't encourage the younger kids to climb beyond their limits but can still prove an interesting puzzle for the 5-10 year olds.
I feel like the type of playground design you're talking of started emerging in the late 00s, early 10s. It's great fun playing with my son in these, even as an adult! (Although my wife disapproves of me showing him some of the more dangerous things beyond the edge of his current envelope.)
They started in the 1980s, but it since most playgrounds are expected to last for many years they were a small minority of playgrounds until the time frame you name.
As a kid my parents knew a school principal - he retired around 1990, before he retired he was under pressure to upgrade the playground and he always refused because he went to other schools with upgraded playgrounds and watch kids not use all the expensive new stuff so he refused to waste money installing it. When he retired the school did a big fund raiser for modern equipment - and sure enough after installed kids didn't use it.
IIRC the gist of the article was that playgrounds should always include risk elements because otherwise the children will use the playground against its design to find those risks (e.g. climb up on top of a structure which was designed that you play inside of it). The crucial element though was that risks should be calculatable and there should not be surprising dangerous outcomes.
I have to say looking at the playgrounds available to my kids here in Sweden, I'm pretty jealous of them, we didn't have such cool playgrounds available to us (or they were very rare). It is sometimes terrifying to watch as a parent, but look like great fun.