- Email: [email protected]
Monitoring visitors to UK countryside resources The approaches of land and recreation resource management organisations to visitor monitoring
Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
Monitoring visitors to UK countryside resources The approaches of land and recreation resource management organisations to visitor monitoring Andy Cope!,*, David Doxford", Christopher Probert# !School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Sunderland, Benedict Building, St. George's Way, Sunderland SR2 7BW, UK "Northumberland National Park, Eastburn, South Park, Hexham, Northumberland, NE46 1BS, UK #Forest Enterprise, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK Received 6 April 1999; received in revised form 12 September 1999; accepted 23 September 1999
Abstract Visitor monitoring is an increasingly common and important aspect of the management of informal recreation resources in the UK. A semi-structured interview process was undertaken involving a selection of organisations concerned with management of recreation and conservation resources. The management functions for which data is used are considered and the approaches used to monitor visitors assessed. Perceptions of the value of the information are discussed, and some examples of innovative mechanisms for applying the data are described. Finally, the relationship between the processes of data collection and application are analysed. This paper describes research which follows on from that reported in Cope and Hill (1997. Countryside recreation Network News 5(2), 10,11). ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Countryside recreation; Countryside management; Visitor monitoring; Recreation provision organisations; Automatic person counters
Background The need for visitor monitoring in countryside recreation management The expectation of rapidly accelerating growth in participation in informal recreation in the countryside contributed to an unnecessarily restrictive policy attitude towards recreation and access provision in the UK during the 1970s and 1980s (Curry, 1994). The realisation that this anticipated explosion in recreation participation was based on outdated expectations encouraged planners and policy makers to reconsider their philosophical approaches to recreation during the late 1980s and 1990s (Glyptis, 1991; Harrison, 1991). However, the demise of the &boom expectation' management culture left behind a vacuum in policy direction;
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 0191-515-3700; fax: 0191-515-2741. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Cope), [email protected] (D. Doxford), [email protected] (C. Probert)
the mandate for restrictive planning and policy making no longer existed for management organisations (Groome, 1993). No equivalent all-encompassing, contemporary theory emerged to inform decisions. In addition, the variety of recreation and access providers, and their associated management regimes, motivations and funding requirements served to dissipate the commonpurpose planning mantras (Gilg, 1996). Recreation provision organisations have been forced to reappraise their approach to planning in terms of their resources, priorities and the observed nature of the use of their resource. As a consequence planning for recreation and access is becoming less of an exercise in restriction and prohibition, and policy is becoming more liberal with the improved understanding of the nature of recreation (Kay, 1998; Reynolds and Elson, 1996). Planning for recreation on the basis of an empirical understanding of usage trends, participation and demand has become increasingly prevalent during recent years. Curry (1994) advocates recreation provision based on people's desires, rather than managers' perceptions of their desires, and Glyptis (1991) recommends evaluation of demand, understanding public interest, and facilitating
0264-8377/00/$ - see front matter ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 2 6 4 - 8 3 7 7 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 3 5 - 6
60
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
access as key mechanisms for successfully integrating recreation and conservation. Harrison (1991) suggests that: If public intervention in countryside recreation is to better re#ect what people want, then studies of peoples attitudes, expectations and values are required. All three of these authors commend increased understanding of recreation patterns as being central to successful policy making and planning for countryside recreation. Curry and Pack (1993) highlight the lack of empirical data in planning for recreation: a fuller empirical understanding of both participation patterns and recreation damage would provide a sounder basis on which to build strategic policies for countryside recreation. Reynolds and Elson (1996) are even more explicit: Without e!ective monitoring and review it is di$cult to see how managers can make informed decisions. However... procedures for monitoring visitor use and characteristics... are weak and unstructured on many sites. The processes used for the collection of such information are known collectively as &visitor monitoring'. Three distinct components of visitor monitoring can be identi"ed from current literature (Scottish Natural Heritage, 1993; Countryside Commission, 1996; MacGregor, 1998; Cope et al., 1999): f visitor counting describes the collection of quantitative data, indicative of total usage, usage variations or the distribution of visitors; f visitor pro"ling describes the collection of demographic, socio-economic, and recreational pursuit participation information about users in order to describe visitors to a resource; f surveying of visitor opinions is a means of accessing information concerning the attitudes, perceptions and motivations of visitors to a resource. Visitor counting may be conducted manually, or by a range of technologically advanced methods, such as infrared detection, pressure-sensitive piezo mats, or broken beam systems. Bicycles and motorised tra$c can also be counted, usually by induction loops. Visitor pro"ling and opinion surveying are frequently conducted by questionnaire, whether interviewer administered or selfcompletion, although other methods may also be used, particularly for opinion surveying, such as focus group consultation. Evidence of the increasingly common adoption of visitor monitoring on recreation sites inspired an investigation to assess how a variety of UK land management
organisations undertake such research as part of their recreation provision service. A semi-structured interview was developed and a number of suitable target organisations active in the recreation and conservation sector were identi"ed for the research programme. The following sections outline the processes used and describe the results of the research. Design of semi-structured interview and selection of contributors The design of the semi-structured interview and the selection of organisations suitable for involvement in the interviewing process were guided by a previous largescale postal survey of managers of recreation resources in England and Wales. AONBs, country parks, heritage coasts, local authorities, national parks, national trails, National Trust regions, RSPB reserves and Wildlife Trusts were included in the survey which was conducted in 1996 (see Table 1 for acronyms). A self-completion questionnaire was sent to managers in order to review the extent and nature of visitor monitoring as practiced on countryside recreation sites and resources. 234 responses were received from a total of 330 distributed questionnaires. The research showed that some form of visitor monitoring is undertaken on a large proportion of informal recreation sites, utilising a wide range of methodologies. Information was most commonly used to aid site planning and development, to inform policy making, and to facilitate the review of management performance. Predictably those managers most heavily engaged in monitoring held the value of such information in the highest regard (Cope and Hill, 1997). The semi-structured interview was designed in order that questions which had been closed on the self-completion questionnaire could be asked in a way that allowed respondents to expand on their original answers. Examples of good practice could then be investigated at length, and the common elements identi"ed, and the areas of divergence considered. The areas of particular interest were: f the factors encouraging managers to monitor visitors to their resource; f the approaches to monitoring the recreational use of the resource; f resource managers' perceptions of the value of such data as an aid to management and planning; f mechanisms used to apply the data from visitor monitoring to aid management and planning. Selection of organisations for this research was based on two criteria. Firstly the sample needed to be a representative cross-section of organisations concerned with the provision of recreation opportunities in the UK. Secondly the organisations in the sample needed to be relatively
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
advanced in terms of monitoring their visitors, and therefore most likely to have a valuable input into the research. It was felt that the following sectors needed to be represented in the sub-sample: f organisations holding, or concerned with the management of, major tracts of land; f local authorities; f national park authorities; f organisations concerned with managing network or linear route resources; f organisations principally concerned with management for conservation; f private land holders. The analysis of the original postal survey enabled researchers to identify which organisations would be of greatest interest for further, in-depth study of monitoring practice, based on their approaches to monitoring, the extent of their monitoring, and their attitudes regarding the value of such data. Of particular interest were those
61
organisations who were most active in monitoring terms, and therefore most likely to yield a positive input into the research programme. Organisations selected following the analysis of the original questionnaire included the Forest Enterprise (major land tract manager); Lancashire County Council, Denbighshire County Council, Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council (local authorities); British Waterways, Sustrans, the Pennine Way Coordination Project (linear or network resource-types); the Peak District National Park Authority, the North York Moors National Park Authority (National Parks); and the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust (conservation orientated body). Also identi"ed at this stage were the Wessex National Trust and the Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (conservation orientated bodies), both of which responded enthusiastically to the postal questionnaire, but without being signi"cantly active. However, background research showed that both had adopted monitoring schemes in the intervening period.
Table 1 Organisations contributing to the research process Sector subsection
Organisation and nature of recreation provision
Major land tract managers
Forest Enterprise is responsible for managing the Forestry Commission estate, which consists of landholdings in excess of one million hectares, dedicated not only to timber production, but also to multi-purpose bene"ts including conservation, recreation and public access The Ministry of Defence holds 1% of UK land area, primarily for training purposes; encourages recreational use of within the constraints of security, public safety, conservation and e!ective training (Cope and Doxford, 1997) Scottish Natural Heritage has the role of facilitating enjoyment of natural heritage in Scotland; involved with the production of comprehensive guidance to visitor monitoring (Scottish Natural Heritage, 1993)
Local authorities
Local authorities perform a variety of functions, including addressing local planning issues, provision for recreation, maintenance of public rights of way; many local authorities have designated country parks and countryside service teams; local authorities are encouraged to ensure that provision for recreation meets the needs of the local population, and enhances their range of recreational opportunities; the three authorities are Denbighshire County Council, Lancashire County Council, Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council
National park authorities
The purposes of national park authority designation are; to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage, and to promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the National Park by the public; management plans address recreational and conservational issues; the Peak District National Park Authority and North York Moors National Park Authority are represented
Network or linear route management organisations
British Waterways are responsible for the management of a network of 3500 km of inland waterways; funded early research into infrared person counters; now have counters across the towpath network Sustrans is a civil engineering charity involved with the establishment of the National Cycle Network (NCN), which is partly funded by a Millennium Commission grant of C43.5 million The Pennine Way Coordination Project is responsible for the management of the UKs oldest long distance footpath, from the Midlands to the English-Scottish border; involved with the advancement of person counting technology
Conservation orientated organisations
Yorkshire Wildlife Trust owns or leases 60 nature reserves, primarily concerned with nature conservation through the protection of species and habitats; wildlife conservation has primacy Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty are designated based upon scenic qualities of tracts of land too small to be national parks; Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is represented The National Trust is an independent, private charity with a membership in excess of two million; the Trust conserves country houses and land of historic interest and natural beauty; Wessex National Trust is represented
Private landholders
A number of private estates are concerned with recreation provision; two of the largest, Buccleuch Estates and Devonshire Estates are represented
62
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
Two further major land tract holders, the Ministry of Defence and Scottish Natural Heritage, were added to the sample. The Ministry of Defence made an interesting case due to issues of public access and military land use (Cope and Doxford, 1997). Scottish Natural Heritage were not included in the previous questionnaire as the remit was limited to England and Wales, but their prominence in the "eld of monitoring was exhibited in their important publication, the Visitor Monitoring Training Manual (Scottish Natural Heritage, 1993). Private landholders were represented by two of the largest such owners, the Buccleuch Estates and the Devonshire Estates. Private landholders were not included in the postal questionnaire sample due to the di$culty in obtaining adequate background information. A brief introduction to each of the organisations involved in the research is given in Table 1.
Analysis of data from the interviews The purposes of visitor monitoring The factors which encourage recreation managers to undertake visitor monitoring research are many and varied. Advocating the distribution of resources is frequently cited. On the Forestry Commission estate, the original impetus was to illustrate the public bene"ts of forestry to central government; as a government department the Commission is funded by the Treasury. British Waterways undertake monitoring of recreational users to justify investment into infrastructure and facilities as a part of their internal "nancial process. Denbighshire County Council often provide visitor data to funding agencies to justify initiatives. Lancashire County Council monitor visitors as a means of assessing the value for money of certain initiatives (such as promotional activities) and to lend an empirical basis to budgetary planning. Advocacy for site developments or events are cited as a motivating factor by Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council. Scottish Natural Heritage encourage collection of information which can be used to inform for allocation of sta$ng and resources and associated budgetary implications. The Wessex National Trust anticipate that their empirical estimate of visitor usage will justify provision of additional resources. Visitor monitoring information is also used as a means of guiding policy or informing management strategy, as in the case of military land use and the Ministry of Defence. Forest Enterprise use data to assist with the justi"cation of projects and developments and Scottish Natural Heritage aim to address the problem of a lack of visitor information to guide recreation planning in Scotland. Direct visitor management activity is cited by the Pennine Way Coordination Project, the primary objective at
the outset of the programme being to investigate the relationship between recreational impact and visitor numbers. A key objective was to discredit the exclusionist approach to recreation provision that was frequently advocated at that time, based on the expectation of visitors causing damage to the countryside, and to produce a strategy to cope with those visitor impacts that could be proven. An essential ingredient of such a strategy was knowledge of who was using the route and which sections were being most heavily used. British Waterways are keen to count users of the canal resource to aid management, particularly in terms of ecology and water supply which are heavily in#uenced by the volume of boats on the canal itself. Ministry of Defence managers cite their desire to know details about visitor attitudes to footpaths in order to understand what the wide variety of current users want from their areas. A particular objective of the visitor monitoring conducted by the Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is to address problems caused by the high rate of car-borne users. The motivational basis for undertaking visitor monitoring for both national parks includes the increased use of trend indices and &Best Value' assessment. Both are also concerned with developing their local and regional sustainability indicators, the strength of which lies not just in hard numbers, but in the assessment of trends. The North York Moors National Park Authority document, Measuring Change, is amongst the most advanced attempts to develop a comprehensive set of trend indices: The production and regular review of a State of the Park report is an essential part of the process of developing a sound information base for supporting and monitoring policies for the (management plan) and subsequent reviews. (North York Moors National Park Authority, 1998) Forest Enterprise and Scottish Natural Heritage are also keen to establish trend indices, whilst performance indicators are of more interest to other organisations. Sustrans' (refer to Table 1) monitoring programme is intended to produce data for lobbying and marketing purposes; primarily a gross estimate of use of the National Cycle Network. Several organisations hope to use visitor monitoring information to access external funding. British Waterways intend that quanti"cation of usage will underpin their case for securing funds from external sources such as the European Regional Development Fund, and the UK National Lottery. Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council also cite the value of visitor monitoring data as a basis for lottery funding bids. Economic evaluation of a resource is important for the Forest Enterprise and Scottish Natural Heritage. The former intend to measure the quantity of recreation
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
nationally and assign a "nancial value to it, and the latter to economically appraise certain resources, such as long distance routes. Other objectives include the use of visitor monitoring either to evaluate the success of, or to plan marketing activity. Lancashire County Council intend to monitor a network of paths before and after marketing activity to measure the subsequent changes in usage. Approaches to the collection of visitor monitoring information The mechanisms for generating quantitative visitor usage information range from guesstimates of usage to the application of advanced counting technologies. Neither Buccleuch Estates nor Devonshire Estates uses person counts, automatic or manual, choosing to calculate the number of visitors based on admission receipts to on-site attractions, although this does not take into account casual users of the estate grounds. Guesstimates of visitor numbers are made by the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust and the National Trust. These are usually based on the perceptions of local volunteers and sta! expectations. The Yorkshire Wildlife Trust do keep a record of visitors to one of their 60 sites, where access is by permit only and count tra$c at one further site. Wessex National Trust acknowledge that the guesstimates still used on most National Trust sites do not carry su$cient impetus to be used for initiatives such as assisting with bids for additional funding. Wessex National Trust have recently purchased a number of infrared person counter units to start collection of empirical data. Manual counts of visitors are a feature of the visitor monitoring programmes of the Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the Peak District National Park, and Forest Enterprise (although the latter two organisations also use person and tra$c counters). Some of the local authorities also use manual counts, albeit on an ad hoc basis. More advanced person counting techniques are used by some of the organisations, including British Waterways and the Pennine Way Coordination Project, which liaised to assist in the development of the infrared counter, and have since invested resources in developing procedures for the establishment of person counting locations including data collection mechanisms and calibration procedures. Scottish Natural Heritage have investigated the use of a wide range of person counting technologies in recent years. Lancashire County Council and the Wessex National Trust have recently invested in monitoring technology. Sustrans have expressed considerable interest in bicycle counting technology. Other organisations prefer tra$c counters, particularly the national parks. The robustness of methods used to pro"le and survey visitors is similarly varied. The Devonshire Estates man-
63
agers describe feedback from informal contact between Estate workers and visitors as an important mechanism for improving client satisfaction. The Buccleuch Estates managers are reluctant to disturb visitors with questionnaires. Their policy of providing as pleasant a visitor experience as possible generally precludes such practice. A number of organisations interviewed describe their use of basic visitor surveys, whether interviewer administered or by self-completion. Some organisations have developed extensive survey programmes covering a range of sites or user types. The annual visitor survey conducted by Forest Enterprise includes: f a national survey programme involving between 12 and 20 sites; f local surveys at selected sites; f car park surveys; f surveys of recreational user types; f surveys of people on forest holidays; f surveys of guided walk and event participants. British Waterways undertake a programme of surveys each year which includes informal towpath users, anglers, boaters, and hire boaters (alternate years only). Scottish Natural Heritage back up self-completion questionnaires with follow-up telephone questionnaires in their attempts to measure the economic bene"ts of long distance routes in Scotland. The technique of focus groups was only used by Denbighshire County Council Countryside Service. It undertakes programmes of questionnaires at country parks with the aim of facilitating improved information and interpretation, backed up with focus groups comprised of local residents. Evidence suggests that visitor counting mechanisms and visitor surveying techniques are commonly combined. The visitor monitoring programme conducted on behalf of the Ministry of Defence on the Cheviot Dry Training Area part of Otterburn Army Training Estate, involved a combination of person and tra$c counters, and interview questionnaires. On the Pennine Way surveys of users are undertaken to complement the data from person counters. The North York Moors National Park use networks of tra$c counters and person counters, with self-completion and interview questionnaires used to &add colour to numbers'. A model has been generated to calculate usage rates of accommodation and associated visitor spend, and research is being undertaken to assess the economic impacts of public transport in the Park. The Peak District National Park also have a park-wide network of tra$c counters, but currently operate only a one person counter. An ongoing programme of manual counts and visitor surveying is undertaken at a di!erent site within the Park each year, usually in response to a speci"c issue or need.
64
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
The Mendip Hills is one of several Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty which has conducted a visitor survey based on the guidance produced on behalf of the Countryside Commission (MacGregor, 1998). A telephone survey and on-site questionnaire survey combined with manual visitor counts were used. Subsequently visitor counts were to be undertaken on an annual basis until the programme of questionnairing is repeated 5 years after the "rst survey. Sustrans have developed a user monitoring procedure for the whole of the National Cycle Network which involves interviewer-administered questionnaires, manual observation and bicycle counters. The manual observations serve as a means of automatic counter unit calibration, and address the non-cyclist use of the multiple user routes (a unit that counts bicycles and pedestrians has only recently become available). Other monitoring projects, particularly the C2C cycle route, currently use self-completion questionnaires and automatic counter units to measure tourism impacts. These methods replace the previously practiced ad hoc monitoring and use of anecdotal evidence. Perceptions of the value of visitor monitoring information Forest Enterprise uses information to enhance national, regional and local visitor management through the use of spatial and temporal distribution controls. Trend indices have been developed over a number of years; information is collected at local site level, or at forest district level, and is blended with national level information to provide an indication of corporate performance. The land use issues confronting the Ministry of Defence, not least the continued con#ict between public access and military land use, have led to the realisation that an holistic overview of management issues must be a key priority if it is to retain control of the management of its training areas. Visitor monitoring is regarded as an important component part of this overview. The Ministry of Defence are expected to implement a policy encouraging a strategic approach to management. Representatives of all three local authorities cited their desire to undertake more visitor monitoring than they are currently engaged in. Denbighshire highlight the apparent reluctance of funding agencies to allocate resources to visitor research, despite their desire to see an assessment of the degree of success with which services are being presented to users. &On-the-ground' initiatives tend to be favoured far more than research-type projects. For both Doncaster and Denbighshire, visitor monitoring is regarded as something of a luxury, and is a lower priority than many other functions of the countryside teams. Lancashire cite the need to demonstrate that access to the countryside is not damaging the physical resource, and would like to monitor other routes in the county.
Information generated by the North York Moors visitor monitoring programme is not directly applied as a management tool, but is used to derive an holistic picture of trends which can be used to &manage out' problems. This baseline information goes beyond the monitoring of visitors to the national park, but such research is a major constituent part of it. The Peak District National Park Authority cite the value of their visitor monitoring data as being an aid to formulation and substantiation of planning policies for development and management plans. Monitoring is also important at a corporate level, especially with regard to funding, and the money allocated should therefore be seen in a wider context; visitor monitoring data will be increasingly applied to applications for access to external funding. In addition to providing British Waterways with essential information to assist with funding bids and for judging "nance and resource allocation, visitor monitoring data is vital in environmental assessment terms, and information is a prerequisite for canal restoration projects. The information collected from the surveys is used for: f addressing customer care issues (and associated indicators); f risk assessment via accident information (especially re minor injuries); f enhancing value of monitoring projects by supplementing information from counter units; f aiding preparation of funding bids through expenditure information; f managing con#ict; f supplementing local management information. The representatives of the Pennine Way Coordination Project question whether a recreational resource can be e!ectively managed without e!ective visitor monitoring, the results of which can be used to produce e!ective strategies, enhance management planning, and provide a meaningful base of information. Person counters will continue to be the basis of accurate information on the Pennine Way and periodic user pro"le checks will be made to monitor changes. There is a desire to relate the cost of surveys to the accuracy and value of the data. Funding bids such as lottery projects will require increased use of such information. A lack of quantitative information is expected to undermine the likelihood of a successful outcome to a funding bid. Sustrans consider project reports to be a vital tool for retrospective advocacy of the development of the route, based on its success in terms of participation rates and "nancial performance. Other recreational routes have been developed following demonstration of the success of the C2C. These range from local and regional routes, to national and international (trans-European) routes. Public sector investment is a key factor in the success of such routes and economic bene"ts data provides an advocative basis for such investment.
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
There are currently no direct management implications for Yorkshire Wildlife Trust reserves based on the limited volume of visitor monitoring information, although "gures are returned to the main funding agency, English Nature, in quarterly reports. The Wessex National Trust anticipate that empirically based data will serve to emphasise the relative importance in terms of visitor volume of open-space sites, as compared with sites on which the principle focus is historic buildings, and help to redress the funding imbalance between the two site types which is perceived by the area warden. The relatively low visitor numbers to some areas of the Mendip Hills caused the management regime to question the value of visitor count data, but two factors led to its acceptance. Firstly, such data would be a vital stage of evaluation of the success of visitor management initiatives, and secondly it would be a critical component of trend index generation. There is a divergence of views between the managers of the private estates concerning the usefulness of monitoring data. According to the Devonshire Estate, visitor monitoring information can be collected easily enough, but slavishly following the outcomes can spoil the individuality of the visit. The Estates plan a one o! survey and count programme during 2001 as a yardstick for future reference. The Buccleuch Estates managers would like to undertake more monitoring than they currently do, although continuity would be vital if a scheme was introduced. They regard visitor monitoring as an important component in securing a slice of the leisure market in the future. Innovative use of visitor monitoring data The practical application of information from visitor monitoring schemes is undertaken with varying degrees of success by the organisations highlighted in this study. Some of the most innovative examples of e!ective data application include: f the use of detailed visitor monitoring information in the Pennine Way Management and marketing strategy (Pennine Way Coordination Project, 1996), and explicit expression of the desire to continue to monitor route use to inform management decision-making; f the inclusion of visitor monitoring information in the Integrated Land Management Plan for the Otterburn Training Area, which comprises the holistic overview of management issues required by the Ministry of Defence as a means of justifying the continued use of the area for training purposes; f British Waterways' development of a &balanced scorecard' of indicators relating to corporate performance, incorporating "nancial and non-"nancial factors, and ethical factors, and including visitor numbers, customer care measures, organisational awareness and social bene"ts of canals;
65
f development of a set of trend indices by the North York Moors National Park Authority in Measuring change, the value of which lies in its regular review and eventual reinterpretation as a &state of the park' report; f Scottish Natural Heritages' &core network proposal' will translate local trends in visitor usage at 40 key locations into a national indicator of #uctuations to provide a strategic overview of how recreational use patterns change over time; f &benchmarking' by the Forest Enterprise of individual forest sites in order to compare their performance with the performance of other sites of a similar nature, and thereby attempting to justify the Forestry Commissions' current funding position, and providing information useful for lobbying for a variety of purposes; f pre-emptive monitoring of a network of footpaths by Lancashire County Council in order to evaluate the success or otherwise of proposed marketing and promotional activity.
Conclusions A consideration of the results from the survey The semi-structured interview process reveals eight categories of management activity which can be guided by information from visitor monitoring programmes: f advocacy or justi"cation of resource distribution; f formulation of policy and informing management strategies; f aiding visitor management initiatives; f development of long-term trends indices; f generation of performance indicators; f enhancement of grant aid funding opportunities; f evaluating economic performance; f better targeting of marketing and promotional activities. Such diversity is indicative of the reasons why countryside recreation managers increasingly perceive visitor monitoring to be an important part of their role in terms of de"ning the nature of provision. Evidence of the recognition of this fact is revealed by the wide array of methodological and technological approaches used in the collection of visitor monitoring information. Interviewee assessment of the value of monitoring data to their organisation further emphasises this point. Responses were wide ranging, but issues which repeatedly arose included: f the importance of data as an empirical basis for planning; f the need for the development of long term trend records; f the value of such data as an accompaniment to applications for funding.
66
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
The examples of good practice in the application of visitor monitoring information to achieve management goals, or informing key management areas, illustrate three important points. Firstly, they underline the importance of understanding the objectives of the exercise from the outset. Secondly, a clear understanding of the objectives ensures that &the right data' is collected through the programme. None of the initiatives could have been successfully followed through without a strong clarity of purpose, or without the collection of appropriate information. Thirdly, it is essential to ensure that not only are the aims understood and the information requirements clear, but that the outcomes can be used to bridge the gap between simply collecting information, and being able to apply the information to guide and inform management objectives and initiatives.
a true management tool, but is in fact a constituent part of an holistic picture which can be used to &manage-out' problems (i.e. the Measuring Change trend index report). Other organisations appear to be shifting towards a similar viewpoint, for example the &balanced scorecard' of British Waterways, the &core network proposal' of Scottish Natural Heritage, and the &benchmarking' of the Forestry Commission. Each of these will contain information from visitor monitoring sources, as well as other information, which will play a vital role in planning and managing recreation. Perhaps the acceptance of this concept as a practical reality will accentuate the value of visitor monitoring research and force it even further into the mainstream of informal countryside recreation management activity.
Implications of the results from the study
References
It is this gap between the collection and application of visitor monitoring information that provides the greatest challenge to managers engaging in such research. The research programme identi"ed two recurring themes which appear to have been particularly problematical with regard to this issue:
Cope, A.M., Doxford, D., 1997. Visitor monitoring: Otterburn training area. Managing Leisure 2, 217}229. Cope, A.M., Doxford, D., Millar, G., 1999. Counting users of informal recreation resources. Managing Leisure. Cope, A.M., Hill, A.I., 1997. Monitoring the monitors. Countryside Recreation Network News 5 (2), 10}11. Countryside Commission, 1996. Market Research for Countryside Recreation, CCP 491. Countryside Commission, Cheltenham. Curry, N., 1994. Countryside Recreation, Access and land Use Planning. E. & F. N. Spon, London. Curry, N., Pack, C., 1993. Planning on presumption: strategic planning for countryside recreation in England and Wales. Land Use Policy, April, 140}150. Gilg, A.W., 1996. Countryside Planning. Routledge, London. Glyptis, S. 1991. Countryside Recreation. Longman in association with the Institute of Leisure and Amenity Management, Harlow, Essex. Groome, D., 1993. Planning and Rural Recreation in Britain. Avebury, Aldershot. Harrison, C., 1991. Countryside Recreation in a Changing Society. TMS Partnership Ltd, London. Kay, G., 1998. Detecting Patterns of Countryside Recreation with Special Reference to Recreational Walking. Occasional Papers Series A: Geographical Research no. 8, Division of Geography, Sta!ordshire University, Sta!ordshire. MacGregor, C., 1998. A Guide to Collecting Visitor Information for AONBs. Centre for Leisure Research, Edinburgh. North York Moors National Park Authority, 1998. Measuring Change. North York Moors National Park Authority, Helmsley, York. Pennine Way Coordination Project, 1996. Pennine Way Management and marketing strategy: 1996 to 2001, Pennine Way Coordination Project, West Yorkshire. Reynolds, G., Elson, M.J., 1996. The sustainable use of sensitive countryside sites for sport and active recreation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 39 (4), 563}576. Scottish Natural Heritage. 1993. Visitor Monitoring Training Manual. Scottish Natural Heritage, Edinburgh.
f a proportion of the data that is being collected is not being applied to ful"ll any management objectives; f managers have a limited understanding of how best to apply information to the planning and management process to ensure success. A number of organisations indicated their awareness that they have in the past collected information and have not used it to best advantage. Scottish Natural Heritage and Forest Enterprise are particularly concerned with addressing this situation, "rstly by ensuring that current data collection is focused and purposeful, and secondly by attempting to retrospectively apply older information into applications such as trend indexing. The application of monitoring information to assist in achieving management goals is an area of concern to other organisations. It is clear that the value of data is greatest when monitoring objectives are explicitly clear at the outset and a focus is maintained throughout data collection. It is apparent that for some organisations the application of visitor monitoring data and its successful application to achieving a management goal will continue to present considerable problems. The North York Moors National Park Authority suggested that such data is not
Monitoring visitors to UK countryside resources The approaches of land and recreation resource management organisations to visitor monitoring Andy Cope!,*, David Doxford", Christopher Probert# !School of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Sunderland, Benedict Building, St. George's Way, Sunderland SR2 7BW, UK "Northumberland National Park, Eastburn, South Park, Hexham, Northumberland, NE46 1BS, UK #Forest Enterprise, 231 Corstorphine Road, Edinburgh EH12 7AT, UK Received 6 April 1999; received in revised form 12 September 1999; accepted 23 September 1999
Abstract Visitor monitoring is an increasingly common and important aspect of the management of informal recreation resources in the UK. A semi-structured interview process was undertaken involving a selection of organisations concerned with management of recreation and conservation resources. The management functions for which data is used are considered and the approaches used to monitor visitors assessed. Perceptions of the value of the information are discussed, and some examples of innovative mechanisms for applying the data are described. Finally, the relationship between the processes of data collection and application are analysed. This paper describes research which follows on from that reported in Cope and Hill (1997. Countryside recreation Network News 5(2), 10,11). ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Countryside recreation; Countryside management; Visitor monitoring; Recreation provision organisations; Automatic person counters
Background The need for visitor monitoring in countryside recreation management The expectation of rapidly accelerating growth in participation in informal recreation in the countryside contributed to an unnecessarily restrictive policy attitude towards recreation and access provision in the UK during the 1970s and 1980s (Curry, 1994). The realisation that this anticipated explosion in recreation participation was based on outdated expectations encouraged planners and policy makers to reconsider their philosophical approaches to recreation during the late 1980s and 1990s (Glyptis, 1991; Harrison, 1991). However, the demise of the &boom expectation' management culture left behind a vacuum in policy direction;
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 0191-515-3700; fax: 0191-515-2741. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Cope), [email protected] (D. Doxford), [email protected] (C. Probert)
the mandate for restrictive planning and policy making no longer existed for management organisations (Groome, 1993). No equivalent all-encompassing, contemporary theory emerged to inform decisions. In addition, the variety of recreation and access providers, and their associated management regimes, motivations and funding requirements served to dissipate the commonpurpose planning mantras (Gilg, 1996). Recreation provision organisations have been forced to reappraise their approach to planning in terms of their resources, priorities and the observed nature of the use of their resource. As a consequence planning for recreation and access is becoming less of an exercise in restriction and prohibition, and policy is becoming more liberal with the improved understanding of the nature of recreation (Kay, 1998; Reynolds and Elson, 1996). Planning for recreation on the basis of an empirical understanding of usage trends, participation and demand has become increasingly prevalent during recent years. Curry (1994) advocates recreation provision based on people's desires, rather than managers' perceptions of their desires, and Glyptis (1991) recommends evaluation of demand, understanding public interest, and facilitating
0264-8377/00/$ - see front matter ( 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 2 6 4 - 8 3 7 7 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 3 5 - 6
60
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
access as key mechanisms for successfully integrating recreation and conservation. Harrison (1991) suggests that: If public intervention in countryside recreation is to better re#ect what people want, then studies of peoples attitudes, expectations and values are required. All three of these authors commend increased understanding of recreation patterns as being central to successful policy making and planning for countryside recreation. Curry and Pack (1993) highlight the lack of empirical data in planning for recreation: a fuller empirical understanding of both participation patterns and recreation damage would provide a sounder basis on which to build strategic policies for countryside recreation. Reynolds and Elson (1996) are even more explicit: Without e!ective monitoring and review it is di$cult to see how managers can make informed decisions. However... procedures for monitoring visitor use and characteristics... are weak and unstructured on many sites. The processes used for the collection of such information are known collectively as &visitor monitoring'. Three distinct components of visitor monitoring can be identi"ed from current literature (Scottish Natural Heritage, 1993; Countryside Commission, 1996; MacGregor, 1998; Cope et al., 1999): f visitor counting describes the collection of quantitative data, indicative of total usage, usage variations or the distribution of visitors; f visitor pro"ling describes the collection of demographic, socio-economic, and recreational pursuit participation information about users in order to describe visitors to a resource; f surveying of visitor opinions is a means of accessing information concerning the attitudes, perceptions and motivations of visitors to a resource. Visitor counting may be conducted manually, or by a range of technologically advanced methods, such as infrared detection, pressure-sensitive piezo mats, or broken beam systems. Bicycles and motorised tra$c can also be counted, usually by induction loops. Visitor pro"ling and opinion surveying are frequently conducted by questionnaire, whether interviewer administered or selfcompletion, although other methods may also be used, particularly for opinion surveying, such as focus group consultation. Evidence of the increasingly common adoption of visitor monitoring on recreation sites inspired an investigation to assess how a variety of UK land management
organisations undertake such research as part of their recreation provision service. A semi-structured interview was developed and a number of suitable target organisations active in the recreation and conservation sector were identi"ed for the research programme. The following sections outline the processes used and describe the results of the research. Design of semi-structured interview and selection of contributors The design of the semi-structured interview and the selection of organisations suitable for involvement in the interviewing process were guided by a previous largescale postal survey of managers of recreation resources in England and Wales. AONBs, country parks, heritage coasts, local authorities, national parks, national trails, National Trust regions, RSPB reserves and Wildlife Trusts were included in the survey which was conducted in 1996 (see Table 1 for acronyms). A self-completion questionnaire was sent to managers in order to review the extent and nature of visitor monitoring as practiced on countryside recreation sites and resources. 234 responses were received from a total of 330 distributed questionnaires. The research showed that some form of visitor monitoring is undertaken on a large proportion of informal recreation sites, utilising a wide range of methodologies. Information was most commonly used to aid site planning and development, to inform policy making, and to facilitate the review of management performance. Predictably those managers most heavily engaged in monitoring held the value of such information in the highest regard (Cope and Hill, 1997). The semi-structured interview was designed in order that questions which had been closed on the self-completion questionnaire could be asked in a way that allowed respondents to expand on their original answers. Examples of good practice could then be investigated at length, and the common elements identi"ed, and the areas of divergence considered. The areas of particular interest were: f the factors encouraging managers to monitor visitors to their resource; f the approaches to monitoring the recreational use of the resource; f resource managers' perceptions of the value of such data as an aid to management and planning; f mechanisms used to apply the data from visitor monitoring to aid management and planning. Selection of organisations for this research was based on two criteria. Firstly the sample needed to be a representative cross-section of organisations concerned with the provision of recreation opportunities in the UK. Secondly the organisations in the sample needed to be relatively
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
advanced in terms of monitoring their visitors, and therefore most likely to have a valuable input into the research. It was felt that the following sectors needed to be represented in the sub-sample: f organisations holding, or concerned with the management of, major tracts of land; f local authorities; f national park authorities; f organisations concerned with managing network or linear route resources; f organisations principally concerned with management for conservation; f private land holders. The analysis of the original postal survey enabled researchers to identify which organisations would be of greatest interest for further, in-depth study of monitoring practice, based on their approaches to monitoring, the extent of their monitoring, and their attitudes regarding the value of such data. Of particular interest were those
61
organisations who were most active in monitoring terms, and therefore most likely to yield a positive input into the research programme. Organisations selected following the analysis of the original questionnaire included the Forest Enterprise (major land tract manager); Lancashire County Council, Denbighshire County Council, Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council (local authorities); British Waterways, Sustrans, the Pennine Way Coordination Project (linear or network resource-types); the Peak District National Park Authority, the North York Moors National Park Authority (National Parks); and the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust (conservation orientated body). Also identi"ed at this stage were the Wessex National Trust and the Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (conservation orientated bodies), both of which responded enthusiastically to the postal questionnaire, but without being signi"cantly active. However, background research showed that both had adopted monitoring schemes in the intervening period.
Table 1 Organisations contributing to the research process Sector subsection
Organisation and nature of recreation provision
Major land tract managers
Forest Enterprise is responsible for managing the Forestry Commission estate, which consists of landholdings in excess of one million hectares, dedicated not only to timber production, but also to multi-purpose bene"ts including conservation, recreation and public access The Ministry of Defence holds 1% of UK land area, primarily for training purposes; encourages recreational use of within the constraints of security, public safety, conservation and e!ective training (Cope and Doxford, 1997) Scottish Natural Heritage has the role of facilitating enjoyment of natural heritage in Scotland; involved with the production of comprehensive guidance to visitor monitoring (Scottish Natural Heritage, 1993)
Local authorities
Local authorities perform a variety of functions, including addressing local planning issues, provision for recreation, maintenance of public rights of way; many local authorities have designated country parks and countryside service teams; local authorities are encouraged to ensure that provision for recreation meets the needs of the local population, and enhances their range of recreational opportunities; the three authorities are Denbighshire County Council, Lancashire County Council, Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council
National park authorities
The purposes of national park authority designation are; to conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage, and to promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the National Park by the public; management plans address recreational and conservational issues; the Peak District National Park Authority and North York Moors National Park Authority are represented
Network or linear route management organisations
British Waterways are responsible for the management of a network of 3500 km of inland waterways; funded early research into infrared person counters; now have counters across the towpath network Sustrans is a civil engineering charity involved with the establishment of the National Cycle Network (NCN), which is partly funded by a Millennium Commission grant of C43.5 million The Pennine Way Coordination Project is responsible for the management of the UKs oldest long distance footpath, from the Midlands to the English-Scottish border; involved with the advancement of person counting technology
Conservation orientated organisations
Yorkshire Wildlife Trust owns or leases 60 nature reserves, primarily concerned with nature conservation through the protection of species and habitats; wildlife conservation has primacy Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty are designated based upon scenic qualities of tracts of land too small to be national parks; Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is represented The National Trust is an independent, private charity with a membership in excess of two million; the Trust conserves country houses and land of historic interest and natural beauty; Wessex National Trust is represented
Private landholders
A number of private estates are concerned with recreation provision; two of the largest, Buccleuch Estates and Devonshire Estates are represented
62
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
Two further major land tract holders, the Ministry of Defence and Scottish Natural Heritage, were added to the sample. The Ministry of Defence made an interesting case due to issues of public access and military land use (Cope and Doxford, 1997). Scottish Natural Heritage were not included in the previous questionnaire as the remit was limited to England and Wales, but their prominence in the "eld of monitoring was exhibited in their important publication, the Visitor Monitoring Training Manual (Scottish Natural Heritage, 1993). Private landholders were represented by two of the largest such owners, the Buccleuch Estates and the Devonshire Estates. Private landholders were not included in the postal questionnaire sample due to the di$culty in obtaining adequate background information. A brief introduction to each of the organisations involved in the research is given in Table 1.
Analysis of data from the interviews The purposes of visitor monitoring The factors which encourage recreation managers to undertake visitor monitoring research are many and varied. Advocating the distribution of resources is frequently cited. On the Forestry Commission estate, the original impetus was to illustrate the public bene"ts of forestry to central government; as a government department the Commission is funded by the Treasury. British Waterways undertake monitoring of recreational users to justify investment into infrastructure and facilities as a part of their internal "nancial process. Denbighshire County Council often provide visitor data to funding agencies to justify initiatives. Lancashire County Council monitor visitors as a means of assessing the value for money of certain initiatives (such as promotional activities) and to lend an empirical basis to budgetary planning. Advocacy for site developments or events are cited as a motivating factor by Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council. Scottish Natural Heritage encourage collection of information which can be used to inform for allocation of sta$ng and resources and associated budgetary implications. The Wessex National Trust anticipate that their empirical estimate of visitor usage will justify provision of additional resources. Visitor monitoring information is also used as a means of guiding policy or informing management strategy, as in the case of military land use and the Ministry of Defence. Forest Enterprise use data to assist with the justi"cation of projects and developments and Scottish Natural Heritage aim to address the problem of a lack of visitor information to guide recreation planning in Scotland. Direct visitor management activity is cited by the Pennine Way Coordination Project, the primary objective at
the outset of the programme being to investigate the relationship between recreational impact and visitor numbers. A key objective was to discredit the exclusionist approach to recreation provision that was frequently advocated at that time, based on the expectation of visitors causing damage to the countryside, and to produce a strategy to cope with those visitor impacts that could be proven. An essential ingredient of such a strategy was knowledge of who was using the route and which sections were being most heavily used. British Waterways are keen to count users of the canal resource to aid management, particularly in terms of ecology and water supply which are heavily in#uenced by the volume of boats on the canal itself. Ministry of Defence managers cite their desire to know details about visitor attitudes to footpaths in order to understand what the wide variety of current users want from their areas. A particular objective of the visitor monitoring conducted by the Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty is to address problems caused by the high rate of car-borne users. The motivational basis for undertaking visitor monitoring for both national parks includes the increased use of trend indices and &Best Value' assessment. Both are also concerned with developing their local and regional sustainability indicators, the strength of which lies not just in hard numbers, but in the assessment of trends. The North York Moors National Park Authority document, Measuring Change, is amongst the most advanced attempts to develop a comprehensive set of trend indices: The production and regular review of a State of the Park report is an essential part of the process of developing a sound information base for supporting and monitoring policies for the (management plan) and subsequent reviews. (North York Moors National Park Authority, 1998) Forest Enterprise and Scottish Natural Heritage are also keen to establish trend indices, whilst performance indicators are of more interest to other organisations. Sustrans' (refer to Table 1) monitoring programme is intended to produce data for lobbying and marketing purposes; primarily a gross estimate of use of the National Cycle Network. Several organisations hope to use visitor monitoring information to access external funding. British Waterways intend that quanti"cation of usage will underpin their case for securing funds from external sources such as the European Regional Development Fund, and the UK National Lottery. Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council also cite the value of visitor monitoring data as a basis for lottery funding bids. Economic evaluation of a resource is important for the Forest Enterprise and Scottish Natural Heritage. The former intend to measure the quantity of recreation
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
nationally and assign a "nancial value to it, and the latter to economically appraise certain resources, such as long distance routes. Other objectives include the use of visitor monitoring either to evaluate the success of, or to plan marketing activity. Lancashire County Council intend to monitor a network of paths before and after marketing activity to measure the subsequent changes in usage. Approaches to the collection of visitor monitoring information The mechanisms for generating quantitative visitor usage information range from guesstimates of usage to the application of advanced counting technologies. Neither Buccleuch Estates nor Devonshire Estates uses person counts, automatic or manual, choosing to calculate the number of visitors based on admission receipts to on-site attractions, although this does not take into account casual users of the estate grounds. Guesstimates of visitor numbers are made by the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust and the National Trust. These are usually based on the perceptions of local volunteers and sta! expectations. The Yorkshire Wildlife Trust do keep a record of visitors to one of their 60 sites, where access is by permit only and count tra$c at one further site. Wessex National Trust acknowledge that the guesstimates still used on most National Trust sites do not carry su$cient impetus to be used for initiatives such as assisting with bids for additional funding. Wessex National Trust have recently purchased a number of infrared person counter units to start collection of empirical data. Manual counts of visitors are a feature of the visitor monitoring programmes of the Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the Peak District National Park, and Forest Enterprise (although the latter two organisations also use person and tra$c counters). Some of the local authorities also use manual counts, albeit on an ad hoc basis. More advanced person counting techniques are used by some of the organisations, including British Waterways and the Pennine Way Coordination Project, which liaised to assist in the development of the infrared counter, and have since invested resources in developing procedures for the establishment of person counting locations including data collection mechanisms and calibration procedures. Scottish Natural Heritage have investigated the use of a wide range of person counting technologies in recent years. Lancashire County Council and the Wessex National Trust have recently invested in monitoring technology. Sustrans have expressed considerable interest in bicycle counting technology. Other organisations prefer tra$c counters, particularly the national parks. The robustness of methods used to pro"le and survey visitors is similarly varied. The Devonshire Estates man-
63
agers describe feedback from informal contact between Estate workers and visitors as an important mechanism for improving client satisfaction. The Buccleuch Estates managers are reluctant to disturb visitors with questionnaires. Their policy of providing as pleasant a visitor experience as possible generally precludes such practice. A number of organisations interviewed describe their use of basic visitor surveys, whether interviewer administered or by self-completion. Some organisations have developed extensive survey programmes covering a range of sites or user types. The annual visitor survey conducted by Forest Enterprise includes: f a national survey programme involving between 12 and 20 sites; f local surveys at selected sites; f car park surveys; f surveys of recreational user types; f surveys of people on forest holidays; f surveys of guided walk and event participants. British Waterways undertake a programme of surveys each year which includes informal towpath users, anglers, boaters, and hire boaters (alternate years only). Scottish Natural Heritage back up self-completion questionnaires with follow-up telephone questionnaires in their attempts to measure the economic bene"ts of long distance routes in Scotland. The technique of focus groups was only used by Denbighshire County Council Countryside Service. It undertakes programmes of questionnaires at country parks with the aim of facilitating improved information and interpretation, backed up with focus groups comprised of local residents. Evidence suggests that visitor counting mechanisms and visitor surveying techniques are commonly combined. The visitor monitoring programme conducted on behalf of the Ministry of Defence on the Cheviot Dry Training Area part of Otterburn Army Training Estate, involved a combination of person and tra$c counters, and interview questionnaires. On the Pennine Way surveys of users are undertaken to complement the data from person counters. The North York Moors National Park use networks of tra$c counters and person counters, with self-completion and interview questionnaires used to &add colour to numbers'. A model has been generated to calculate usage rates of accommodation and associated visitor spend, and research is being undertaken to assess the economic impacts of public transport in the Park. The Peak District National Park also have a park-wide network of tra$c counters, but currently operate only a one person counter. An ongoing programme of manual counts and visitor surveying is undertaken at a di!erent site within the Park each year, usually in response to a speci"c issue or need.
64
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
The Mendip Hills is one of several Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty which has conducted a visitor survey based on the guidance produced on behalf of the Countryside Commission (MacGregor, 1998). A telephone survey and on-site questionnaire survey combined with manual visitor counts were used. Subsequently visitor counts were to be undertaken on an annual basis until the programme of questionnairing is repeated 5 years after the "rst survey. Sustrans have developed a user monitoring procedure for the whole of the National Cycle Network which involves interviewer-administered questionnaires, manual observation and bicycle counters. The manual observations serve as a means of automatic counter unit calibration, and address the non-cyclist use of the multiple user routes (a unit that counts bicycles and pedestrians has only recently become available). Other monitoring projects, particularly the C2C cycle route, currently use self-completion questionnaires and automatic counter units to measure tourism impacts. These methods replace the previously practiced ad hoc monitoring and use of anecdotal evidence. Perceptions of the value of visitor monitoring information Forest Enterprise uses information to enhance national, regional and local visitor management through the use of spatial and temporal distribution controls. Trend indices have been developed over a number of years; information is collected at local site level, or at forest district level, and is blended with national level information to provide an indication of corporate performance. The land use issues confronting the Ministry of Defence, not least the continued con#ict between public access and military land use, have led to the realisation that an holistic overview of management issues must be a key priority if it is to retain control of the management of its training areas. Visitor monitoring is regarded as an important component part of this overview. The Ministry of Defence are expected to implement a policy encouraging a strategic approach to management. Representatives of all three local authorities cited their desire to undertake more visitor monitoring than they are currently engaged in. Denbighshire highlight the apparent reluctance of funding agencies to allocate resources to visitor research, despite their desire to see an assessment of the degree of success with which services are being presented to users. &On-the-ground' initiatives tend to be favoured far more than research-type projects. For both Doncaster and Denbighshire, visitor monitoring is regarded as something of a luxury, and is a lower priority than many other functions of the countryside teams. Lancashire cite the need to demonstrate that access to the countryside is not damaging the physical resource, and would like to monitor other routes in the county.
Information generated by the North York Moors visitor monitoring programme is not directly applied as a management tool, but is used to derive an holistic picture of trends which can be used to &manage out' problems. This baseline information goes beyond the monitoring of visitors to the national park, but such research is a major constituent part of it. The Peak District National Park Authority cite the value of their visitor monitoring data as being an aid to formulation and substantiation of planning policies for development and management plans. Monitoring is also important at a corporate level, especially with regard to funding, and the money allocated should therefore be seen in a wider context; visitor monitoring data will be increasingly applied to applications for access to external funding. In addition to providing British Waterways with essential information to assist with funding bids and for judging "nance and resource allocation, visitor monitoring data is vital in environmental assessment terms, and information is a prerequisite for canal restoration projects. The information collected from the surveys is used for: f addressing customer care issues (and associated indicators); f risk assessment via accident information (especially re minor injuries); f enhancing value of monitoring projects by supplementing information from counter units; f aiding preparation of funding bids through expenditure information; f managing con#ict; f supplementing local management information. The representatives of the Pennine Way Coordination Project question whether a recreational resource can be e!ectively managed without e!ective visitor monitoring, the results of which can be used to produce e!ective strategies, enhance management planning, and provide a meaningful base of information. Person counters will continue to be the basis of accurate information on the Pennine Way and periodic user pro"le checks will be made to monitor changes. There is a desire to relate the cost of surveys to the accuracy and value of the data. Funding bids such as lottery projects will require increased use of such information. A lack of quantitative information is expected to undermine the likelihood of a successful outcome to a funding bid. Sustrans consider project reports to be a vital tool for retrospective advocacy of the development of the route, based on its success in terms of participation rates and "nancial performance. Other recreational routes have been developed following demonstration of the success of the C2C. These range from local and regional routes, to national and international (trans-European) routes. Public sector investment is a key factor in the success of such routes and economic bene"ts data provides an advocative basis for such investment.
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
There are currently no direct management implications for Yorkshire Wildlife Trust reserves based on the limited volume of visitor monitoring information, although "gures are returned to the main funding agency, English Nature, in quarterly reports. The Wessex National Trust anticipate that empirically based data will serve to emphasise the relative importance in terms of visitor volume of open-space sites, as compared with sites on which the principle focus is historic buildings, and help to redress the funding imbalance between the two site types which is perceived by the area warden. The relatively low visitor numbers to some areas of the Mendip Hills caused the management regime to question the value of visitor count data, but two factors led to its acceptance. Firstly, such data would be a vital stage of evaluation of the success of visitor management initiatives, and secondly it would be a critical component of trend index generation. There is a divergence of views between the managers of the private estates concerning the usefulness of monitoring data. According to the Devonshire Estate, visitor monitoring information can be collected easily enough, but slavishly following the outcomes can spoil the individuality of the visit. The Estates plan a one o! survey and count programme during 2001 as a yardstick for future reference. The Buccleuch Estates managers would like to undertake more monitoring than they currently do, although continuity would be vital if a scheme was introduced. They regard visitor monitoring as an important component in securing a slice of the leisure market in the future. Innovative use of visitor monitoring data The practical application of information from visitor monitoring schemes is undertaken with varying degrees of success by the organisations highlighted in this study. Some of the most innovative examples of e!ective data application include: f the use of detailed visitor monitoring information in the Pennine Way Management and marketing strategy (Pennine Way Coordination Project, 1996), and explicit expression of the desire to continue to monitor route use to inform management decision-making; f the inclusion of visitor monitoring information in the Integrated Land Management Plan for the Otterburn Training Area, which comprises the holistic overview of management issues required by the Ministry of Defence as a means of justifying the continued use of the area for training purposes; f British Waterways' development of a &balanced scorecard' of indicators relating to corporate performance, incorporating "nancial and non-"nancial factors, and ethical factors, and including visitor numbers, customer care measures, organisational awareness and social bene"ts of canals;
65
f development of a set of trend indices by the North York Moors National Park Authority in Measuring change, the value of which lies in its regular review and eventual reinterpretation as a &state of the park' report; f Scottish Natural Heritages' &core network proposal' will translate local trends in visitor usage at 40 key locations into a national indicator of #uctuations to provide a strategic overview of how recreational use patterns change over time; f &benchmarking' by the Forest Enterprise of individual forest sites in order to compare their performance with the performance of other sites of a similar nature, and thereby attempting to justify the Forestry Commissions' current funding position, and providing information useful for lobbying for a variety of purposes; f pre-emptive monitoring of a network of footpaths by Lancashire County Council in order to evaluate the success or otherwise of proposed marketing and promotional activity.
Conclusions A consideration of the results from the survey The semi-structured interview process reveals eight categories of management activity which can be guided by information from visitor monitoring programmes: f advocacy or justi"cation of resource distribution; f formulation of policy and informing management strategies; f aiding visitor management initiatives; f development of long-term trends indices; f generation of performance indicators; f enhancement of grant aid funding opportunities; f evaluating economic performance; f better targeting of marketing and promotional activities. Such diversity is indicative of the reasons why countryside recreation managers increasingly perceive visitor monitoring to be an important part of their role in terms of de"ning the nature of provision. Evidence of the recognition of this fact is revealed by the wide array of methodological and technological approaches used in the collection of visitor monitoring information. Interviewee assessment of the value of monitoring data to their organisation further emphasises this point. Responses were wide ranging, but issues which repeatedly arose included: f the importance of data as an empirical basis for planning; f the need for the development of long term trend records; f the value of such data as an accompaniment to applications for funding.
66
A. Cope et al. / Land Use Policy 17 (2000) 59}66
The examples of good practice in the application of visitor monitoring information to achieve management goals, or informing key management areas, illustrate three important points. Firstly, they underline the importance of understanding the objectives of the exercise from the outset. Secondly, a clear understanding of the objectives ensures that &the right data' is collected through the programme. None of the initiatives could have been successfully followed through without a strong clarity of purpose, or without the collection of appropriate information. Thirdly, it is essential to ensure that not only are the aims understood and the information requirements clear, but that the outcomes can be used to bridge the gap between simply collecting information, and being able to apply the information to guide and inform management objectives and initiatives.
a true management tool, but is in fact a constituent part of an holistic picture which can be used to &manage-out' problems (i.e. the Measuring Change trend index report). Other organisations appear to be shifting towards a similar viewpoint, for example the &balanced scorecard' of British Waterways, the &core network proposal' of Scottish Natural Heritage, and the &benchmarking' of the Forestry Commission. Each of these will contain information from visitor monitoring sources, as well as other information, which will play a vital role in planning and managing recreation. Perhaps the acceptance of this concept as a practical reality will accentuate the value of visitor monitoring research and force it even further into the mainstream of informal countryside recreation management activity.
Implications of the results from the study
References
It is this gap between the collection and application of visitor monitoring information that provides the greatest challenge to managers engaging in such research. The research programme identi"ed two recurring themes which appear to have been particularly problematical with regard to this issue:
Cope, A.M., Doxford, D., 1997. Visitor monitoring: Otterburn training area. Managing Leisure 2, 217}229. Cope, A.M., Doxford, D., Millar, G., 1999. Counting users of informal recreation resources. Managing Leisure. Cope, A.M., Hill, A.I., 1997. Monitoring the monitors. Countryside Recreation Network News 5 (2), 10}11. Countryside Commission, 1996. Market Research for Countryside Recreation, CCP 491. Countryside Commission, Cheltenham. Curry, N., 1994. Countryside Recreation, Access and land Use Planning. E. & F. N. Spon, London. Curry, N., Pack, C., 1993. Planning on presumption: strategic planning for countryside recreation in England and Wales. Land Use Policy, April, 140}150. Gilg, A.W., 1996. Countryside Planning. Routledge, London. Glyptis, S. 1991. Countryside Recreation. Longman in association with the Institute of Leisure and Amenity Management, Harlow, Essex. Groome, D., 1993. Planning and Rural Recreation in Britain. Avebury, Aldershot. Harrison, C., 1991. Countryside Recreation in a Changing Society. TMS Partnership Ltd, London. Kay, G., 1998. Detecting Patterns of Countryside Recreation with Special Reference to Recreational Walking. Occasional Papers Series A: Geographical Research no. 8, Division of Geography, Sta!ordshire University, Sta!ordshire. MacGregor, C., 1998. A Guide to Collecting Visitor Information for AONBs. Centre for Leisure Research, Edinburgh. North York Moors National Park Authority, 1998. Measuring Change. North York Moors National Park Authority, Helmsley, York. Pennine Way Coordination Project, 1996. Pennine Way Management and marketing strategy: 1996 to 2001, Pennine Way Coordination Project, West Yorkshire. Reynolds, G., Elson, M.J., 1996. The sustainable use of sensitive countryside sites for sport and active recreation. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 39 (4), 563}576. Scottish Natural Heritage. 1993. Visitor Monitoring Training Manual. Scottish Natural Heritage, Edinburgh.
f a proportion of the data that is being collected is not being applied to ful"ll any management objectives; f managers have a limited understanding of how best to apply information to the planning and management process to ensure success. A number of organisations indicated their awareness that they have in the past collected information and have not used it to best advantage. Scottish Natural Heritage and Forest Enterprise are particularly concerned with addressing this situation, "rstly by ensuring that current data collection is focused and purposeful, and secondly by attempting to retrospectively apply older information into applications such as trend indexing. The application of monitoring information to assist in achieving management goals is an area of concern to other organisations. It is clear that the value of data is greatest when monitoring objectives are explicitly clear at the outset and a focus is maintained throughout data collection. It is apparent that for some organisations the application of visitor monitoring data and its successful application to achieving a management goal will continue to present considerable problems. The North York Moors National Park Authority suggested that such data is not