2010 Report - Waterways Ireland

More documents

Recommendations

Info

23234.2.6 Party Composition and SizeJust over two thirds of all users visited the waterways with at least oneother person, highlighting the important social dimension of the waterways.All types of social groupings are using the waterways including couples,groups of friends or families with children.The Erne and Lower Bann waterways are most likely to attract families withchildren under 12. Day trippers are most likely to visit with young children,with 28% visiting with children aged under 12. Regular users are leastlikely to visit with children under 12 at 11%. The proportion of users visitingwith any children is 18%.Those visiting alone were mainly regular users and locals (92%). As onewould expect, the vast majority of holiday makers visited with at least oneother person. Just 2% of all holiday makers were found to be visiting thewaterways alone.Figure 15: Party CompositionWaterwayTotal(1,625)Barrow(216)%Erne(129)%GrandCanal(152)%LowerBann(137)%RoyalCanal(188)%ShannonErne(229)%Shannon(574)%Alone33%66123136631621Couple27%9263021134133Group of Friends24%13382412112831Family children u.1215%12281627141212Family children 13-185%*755185Club/group*----1-*Professional Organisation**---1--Employer*------*Other*---1--1Base: All waterway users10-031982 Waterway Users Research 2010 Report (1st December)
2424When waterway users are visiting with at least one other person, theaverage party size is three visitors. The Erne and the Shannonwaterways attracted the highest proportion of groups with five or morevisitors.Party SizeFigure 16: Party SizeWaterwayTotal(1,096)%Barrow(74)%Erne(113)%GrandCanal(105)%LowerBann(87)%RoyalCanal(70)%ShannonErne(192)%Shannon(455)%2344714204915163117244914195621960141745131947132256-1011-20691711618-79-651113610-710*21+Not StatedMean Score*33.33193.33-43.76-33.16-22.93-32.91-63.25113.43Base: All visiting with others10-031982 Waterway Users Research 2010 Report (1st December)
Page 1 and 2: Waterway Users Research2010December
Page 3 and 4: 1Executive Summary10-031982 Waterwa
Page 5 and 6: 22their friends and family. This fi
Page 7 and 8: 44Background & Objectives10-031982
Page 9 and 10: 66Research Methodology10-031982 Wat
Page 11 and 12: 883.1 Interviews AchievedInterviews
Page 13 and 14: 10104. Findings4.1 Profile of Water
Page 15 and 16: 1212The chart below illustrates tha
Page 17 and 18: 1414Comparing country of origin acr
Page 19 and 20: 16164.2 Visit to the Waterways4.2.1
Page 21 and 22: 18184.2.3 Motivation to VisitThe ke
Page 23 and 24: 2020In terms of the frequency of us
Page 25: 22224.2.5 Association MembershipAt
Page 29 and 30: 26264.2.8 Visit to the Waterways -
Page 31 and 32: 28284.3 Rating of the Waterways4.3.
Page 33 and 34: 30304.3.3 Reasons for Negative Rati
Page 35 and 36: 32324.3.5 Development of Facilities
Page 37 and 38: 3434Positive ratings have increased
Page 39 and 40: 3636In the 53 cases where there was
Page 41 and 42: 3838In the 40 cases where difficult
Page 43 and 44: 40404.5 International VisitorsFour
Page 45 and 46: 42424.6 ExpenditureAll waterway use
Page 47 and 48: 44444.7 Waterways Ireland4.7.1 Awar
Page 49 and 50: 46464.7.3 The Role of Waterways Ire
Page 51 and 52: 48484.8 Equality SectionThe Waterwa
Page 53 and 54: 5050In terms of ethnic origin, 98%
Page 55 and 56: 52525. ConclusionsAt an overall lev
Page 57 and 58: 5454Appendix A:Copy of Questionnair
Page 59 and 60: Ipsos MRBI | Waterway Users Researc

2010 Report - Waterways Ireland

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?