So, both articles reach conclusions about why kids don’t participate and/or drop out of organized team sports…without including any families who don’t participate and/or dropped out of sports. The only rationale I can see from the Aspen Inst. survey for the conclusion that cost is the primary factor is this: the median income of the families surveyed (those involved in sports) is higher than the national median income; therefore cost is a barrier. One could probably reach a similar conclusion regarding proximity to a local Starbucks: the people surveyed were closer to a local Starbucks than the national median; therefore, lack of proximity to a Starbucks is a factor driving down youth participation in organized team sports.
In my area, opportunities for participation are more plentiful now than they were 10 years ago and there are ample opportunities for recreational play in almost every sport at very low cost. That includes strong financial aid opportunities even at the most competitive level. Far easier for low income families to find cheap sports options than, say, cheap music lessons. Participation levels may be an issue in some areas and sports, but this survey doesn’t get us closer to understanding why.