Assessing the economic impacts of nature based tourism in Scotland

More documents

Recommendations

Info

all visitors as specialist wildlife watchers, motivated to come because of their primary interest in wildlife, which appears to us to be too high (see below). In our view their definition of committed wildlife watchers was too wide. In terms of commitment, casual or opportunist watchers are significantly in the majority. For example, according to the Scottish Visitor Attraction Monitor (Martinolli and Bereziat, 2009) the Scottish Seabird Centre attracted 284,000 visitors in 2008, but only 25% paid to go into the interpretive element of the attraction (Scottish Seabird Centre Marketing Manager, personal comment, 2009.) In Scotland, wildlife tourism is a now a distinct sector within the tourism industry. Wild Scotland is a trade body representing businesses who are principally involved in showing wildlife to visitors on guided holidays, on half day or full day activities on foot or using vehicles or boats or at sites or attractions. NGOs, including the RSPB, NTS and SWT, have sites and nature reserves, some with entry fees, which are promoted as wildlife watching locations to visitors who then buy goods and services in the local area. Similarly visitors are attracted to National Nature Reserves and Forestry Commission Scotland forests to watch wildlife. Recently, television programmes like Springwatch, Coast and Countryfile have boosted numbers at some sites and have, it is suggested, motivated more independent, but mainly casual, watchers. There are also smaller numbers of independent specialist wildlife watching visitors who spend most of their time during their holiday in Scotland watching birds, animals like cetaceans, seals or deer, or studying wild flowers, butterflies or dragonflies. As part or all of their holiday, some visitors will come to Scotland with the main purpose of enjoying a range of bio geographical landscape features from waterfalls to geology. Engaging with landscape features can be linked to wildlife watching but in many cases such visitors might be characterised alongside those who have a more general interest in enjoying the scenery. Some visitors come as volunteers or paying guests on practical conservation holidays related to wildlife or habitat management. Table 17 has reworked definitions and figures from the ICTHR Bournemouth University Study on wildlife tourism. This reworking is based on our own experience, figures from VisitScotland, and figures from destinations like Orkney, Shetland and the Outer Hebrides where wildlife watching is a designated activity in local visitor surveys. Table 17 - Wildlife tourism WILDLIFE WATCHING SUB ACTIVITIES Wildlife Watching Primary Purpose ACTIVITY TYPE TRIP NUMBERS VALUE OF TRIP ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE NATURAL HERITAGE Visitors on guided wildlife watching holiday plus Independent visitors for whom wildlife watching is main purpose of holiday Likely to be members of RSPB, British Trust for Ornithology, 220,000 trips (1.8% of all trips) ICTHR STUDY 2010 5.2% of UK trips 630,000 UK trips 80,000 o/s trips Too high for primary purpose watchers and too low for all watchers Entire holiday motivated by wildlife watching. 31
Wildlife watching Substantial but not exclusive Wildlife Watching Substantial but not exclusive Wildlife Watching Casual/passing SUB TOTAL Provided by VisitScotland - - UKTS data - probably still too low TOTAL Notes: Scottish Ornithology Club etc Guided Wildlife Trip on vehicle, boat, foot Interested in bird watching Visit to NNR, SWT, RSPB reserve Interested in bird watching Occasional visit to reserve, would not pay for guided trip 410,000 trips for both these groups (3.4% of all trips) 290,000 trips UKTS 2008 6.2% of UK trips 518,000 UK trips £153 million 7.6% of UK trips 920,000 trips Plus % of overseas 1 Dedicated wildlife watchers are assumed to be approximately 30% of all those with an interest in wildlife. 2 The ICTHR Bournemouth University Study is based on 5.2% of UK domestic trips to Scotland being made by tourists whose entire trip is motivated by wildlife watching. Our view is that this is too high a figure for ‘pure’ wildlife tourists (we suggest 2-3%) whose expenditure could be attributed almost entirely to the natural heritage. The percentage of visitors to Scotland watching wildlife as part of their trip, however, is assumed to be higher, at an additional 5-6%, for whom varying percentages of their expenditure could be attributed to the natural heritage. 32
Page 1 and 2: Scottish Natural Heritage Commissio
Page 3 and 4: COMMISSIONED REPORT Summary Assessi
Page 5 and 6: 7 CYCLING 45 7.1 Mountain biking 45
Page 7 and 8: List of Tables Page Table 1 - Natur
Page 9 and 10: 1.3 Nature-based tourism For the pu
Page 11 and 12: market and accounts for 83% of tour
Page 13 and 14: expenditure during these trips was
Page 15 and 16: nature site • . Were this spend t
Page 17 and 18: Team members already held many rele
Page 19 and 20: 2.3.2 Assessing employment and inco
Page 21 and 22: • Common resources, which are use
Page 23 and 24: 4 FIELD SPORTS The findings from th
Page 25 and 26: 4.2 Deer management The Contributio
Page 27 and 28: Table 11 - Deer Management in Scotl
Page 29 and 30: • Sea angling questions incorpora
Page 31 and 32: 4.6 Other studies • The trips mos
Page 33 and 34: 3. The Economic Impact of Game and
Page 35 and 36: 5 WILDLIFE WATCHING 5.1 Wildlife to
Page 37: These impacts appear to us to be ov
Page 41 and 42: • Abseiling - allows safe descent
Page 43 and 44: Client: HIE, SNH and VisitScotland
Page 45 and 46: those who said they were walking al
Page 47 and 48: oute was estimated to be in the reg
Page 49 and 50: participants, though in terms of vo
Page 51 and 52: Visit Scotland (2009) provides a fi
Page 53 and 54: This evaluation assessed the ultima
Page 55 and 56: For these motivational reasons, Gre
Page 57 and 58: 8 HORSE RIDING 8.1 Equestrian sport
Page 59 and 60: 9 WATERSPORTS Some watersports can
Page 61 and 62: Watersports are defined in this rep
Page 63 and 64: The methodology resulted in small s
Page 65 and 66: 10 NATURE-RELATED SITES AND FACILIT
Page 67 and 68: Forest Table 29 - Mean spend per tr
Page 69 and 70: Scotland’s canals: the economic e
Page 71 and 72: once displacement is allowed for -
Page 73 and 74: explore the issues they saw as bein
Page 75 and 76: Recent visitor surveys in Orkney (A
Page 77 and 78: Table 45 - UK visitor activities un
Page 79 and 80: 12 THE NATURAL HERITAGE IN SCOTLAND
Page 81 and 82: 12.4 International marketing Intern
Page 83 and 84: Scotland’s NNR Magical Places Ama
Page 85 and 86: 13 PAN-SCOTLAND ANALYSIS 13.1 Reaso
Page 87 and 88: Table 49 - Value of tourism outside
Page 89 and 90:
The total of which this contributio
Page 91 and 92:
Similarly, it is not possible to sp
Page 93 and 94:
Table 52 - Estimated Impacts by act
Page 95 and 96:
14 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESE
Page 97 and 98:
Recommendation 4: It would be desir
Page 99 and 100:
George Street Research and Jones Ec
Page 101 and 102:
Press and Journal. 2010. Tourists g
Page 103 and 104:
Appendix A: Categories of Natural H
Page 105 and 106:
• (Mixed - 19%) The types of walk
Page 107 and 108:
Cycling Segments Scott Porter’s 2
Page 109 and 110:
aqua / snorkelling) or on longer ho
Page 111 and 112:
Appendix B - Methodological Notes 1
Page 113:
www.snh.gov.uk © Scottish Natural
show all

Assessing the economic impacts of nature based tourism in Scotland

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?