Dissertation Read Only
-
Upload
hannah-shaw -
Category
Documents
-
view
35 -
download
0
Transcript of Dissertation Read Only
Introduction:
This research is conducted in collaboration with the North Wales Wildlife Trust (NWWT). In
recent years applications for funding and grants needed to support NWWT’s ongoing
conservation work have become increasingly difficult to secure from both the government
and private organisations. Therefore, alternative methods of generating income for NWWT
need to be explored. With As North Wales having an abundance of natural assets including
wildlife and an established tourism market, it makes sense for NWWT to utilise these existing
assets to generate their needed required income through wildlife tourism. NWWT currently
protect, maintain and restore 720 hectares of land across 34 reserves, they rely heavily on grants
and donations to carry out this work, and are currently only generating small amounts of revenue
independently. It is with this view that this research will focus on understanding social and
economic behaviours of local wildlife tourists, and the potential of visitors at NWWT reserves to
generate income for the Trust. This will be achieved through quantitative and qualitative methods
including surveys and semi-structured interviews. Semi structured interviews will be undertaken
with staff from NWWT to gain a better understanding of their views as a stakeholder within the
tourism industry. A survey with a local wildlife attraction will also be used to quantify visitor
information such as demographics, motivations, and average spend at wildlife sites and attractions.
This knowledge will then be used to create a ‘profile’ of wildlife tourists that visit the North Wales
area, and will subsequently discussed and evaluated to determine the implications it may have for
NWWT.
Good opening paragraph – just be a bit more specific about what this piece of research intends to
explore along with your aims and objectives
Wildlife tourism is usually considered to be a branch of nature tourism and eco-tourism.
Nature tourism can be defined as being the viewing of nature, mainly the observation and/or
study of biotic (living) and abiotic (non-living) components of the environment (Newsome et
al,. 2005). Wildlife tourism is specifically concerned with viewing or encountering wildlife in a
1
range of settings, including captive, semi-captive, and wild. Additionally, wildlife tourism
can be split into two categories (Higginbottom, k. 2004):
Consumptive:
Fishing
Hunting
Non-Consumptive:
Viewing
Photography
Feeding
It is important to note that many literature sources do not specifically refer to ‘wildlife
tourism’, but rather use terms such as eco-tourism, rural tourism and nature-tourism which
often cover (aspects of) wildlife tourism, which is considered by many as a branch of
eco/nature tourism. The research carried out in this dissertation is mainly concerned with
non-consumptive wildlife tourism as defined by Higginbottom (2004), and is done in
collaboration with the North Wales Wildlife Trust (NWWT). There are 47 Wildlife trusts across
the UK,UK; each trust is an independent autonomous charity, whose prime concern is the
conservation of nature within its local area. All the wildlife trusts are part of the Royal
Society of Wildlife Trusts, who are a charity in their own right, but operate as an umbrella
body for the 47 wildlife trusts. The NWWT was founded in 1963, it currently maintains and
cares for approximately 34 nature reserves (across 6 branches) totalling around 720 hectares
of land. The NWWT’s focus is conserving habitats and species throughout the region,
through engaging people with their environment. It is becoming increasingly hard for
organisations such as NWWT to generate the funds needed to carry out their work. Many
governments around the world are finding the justification of public expenditure on parks
and reserves increasingly problematic. As providing financial support to such sites is seen
to only benefit one segment of the population – the visitors. Therefore, it is becoming more
important for parks and reserves to become self-sufficient and generate their own revenue
through new strategies. This itselfin itself presents new challenges as there is statistical
2
evidence between total direct income and number of visitors at reserves (Tye(Tye &
Gordon,1995, 1995). Sites which have more visitors are better financed, this is a self
perpetuating loop; as better financed reserves are better managed, and therefore attract
more visitors. Research is therefore needed to understand the wildlife tourism industry in
North Wales in order for organisations to independently generate much needed revenue.
Findings of this research will have implications for how NWWT themselves can create their own
income.
The approach being adopted will have implications for y in North Wales
Why it is being researched, is useful and any limitations
The structure of the dissertation
Some context may be included- be brief
Your intro gives a good overview briefand any limitationsn North Wales in
orderthis project and your research aims as above
And guide us through the research as a whole – you can do this at the
end perhaps
Literature Review
In order to set the context of this research I will firstly look into literature about the wider
tourism industry in Great Britain, then more specifically into wildlife tourism. Both national
and international markets within wildlife tourism will be explored, paying close attention to
economic and social topics.
To understand how wildlife tourists can generate income for organisations such as NWWT, it is
important to know who wildlife tourists are in terms of their demographics, views and behaviours.
Comprehension of tourist expectations, motivations, and behaviours (such as patterns of spending)
3
is fundamental to organisations which are seeking to gain revenue from the wildlife tourism industry.
Once these factors are fully understood they can be utilised by organisations to create products
which are best suited to their target market, creating the potential for large economic opportunities
and rewards. This in turn will ensure the continual development and growth of the wildlife tourism
industry. In turn, people, wildlife, and the environment should experience an increase in the
associated benefits of having a thriving wildlife tourism industry. Link to the research question
Overview of the Tourism Industry in Great Britain
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has published several reports on the economic value
of the tourism industry. The most recently available figures are for 2011. In Summary, 120.8
billion pounds was spent by tourists in the UK: of which 43% was spent by UK residents on
excursions without an overnight stay, 20% was spent by UK residents enjoying an excursion
followed by 1 night’s stay, 17% was spent by overseas residents on trips to the UK, and the
remaining 20% was spent by UK residents going on overseas trips.
Tourism Direct Gross Value Added (GVA) is a measure of the amount of ‘output’ from
industries that serve the tourism sector which is accounted for by expenditure and
consumption by tourists. The tourism directive GVA for the UK increased by 8% between
2008 and 2011 .Transport and travel services generated the most output within the UK,
followed by food and beverage services, and sports and recreational services. Tourism
Direct GVA also increased in the accommodation sector between 2008 and 2011, this was
largely due to the increase in popularity of the ‘staycation’ where people spend holidays
within the UK rather than abroad. In a report by the ONS (2014); Wales in 2011 ranked first in
2011 t in Tourism Direct GVA ratios (dividing the total demand by total supply in each
region), this shows that tourism is of strong economic importance in this region.
Additionally, Anglesey, Gwynedd, Conwy and Denbighshire where listed among the top 15
4
most important tourism industries nationally (as well as others such as Blackpool and
Cornwall).
During 2011 Wales attracted 879,000 international visitors spending £328 million. The
Republic of Ireland, France, Germany and USA were the four top generating countries for
overseas tourism in Wales. Of these, 42% of International visitors were on a holiday trip, 36%
were visiting friends or relatives and 16% were on business during 2011. In total there were
approximately 10.6 million overnight visitors to Wales spending nearly £ 2.1 billion.
International and National Wildlife Tourism
Internationally there are several countries which are at the forefront of nature tourism/eco-
tourism; Australia, Costa Rica, Tanzania, South Africa and New Zealand (Eagles, 2002). It can
be assumed that this largely due to the presence of large charismatic species, and the
correct infrastructure and management strategies needed to support a growing industry.
Eagles (2002) suggest that the success of wildlife tourism in these countries is down to
influential government policies amongst both the public and private sectors. These policies
foster the development of nature-based tourism through the provision of frameworks and
policies. This has led to increase international visitations to these countries, and the parks
and reserves in these countries. Furthermore, it appears that nature-tourism has created a
circular phenomenon where increased visitation and education has led to the desire for more
parks and reserves, and thus more visitation and education.
On a national scale Scotland is perceived as being a premier wildlife tourism destination
within the United Kingdom, this mainly because it differentiates itself apart from other
destinations through its unique landscapes and species. Habitats which can be seen in
Scotland include mountains, lakes, forests, lochs, lowland moors, coastlines, offshore
islands, bogs and heaths. Charismatic species found in Scotland include cetaceans, seals,
otters, deer, birds of prey such as the osprey, seabirds, inland birds, wading birds and
5
ground nesting birds(birds (Curtin, 2013). There are other destinations within the UK which
provide both unique habitats and species such as Norfolk, Yorkshire, and Wales however
they are not well marketed to the consumer, so receive less interest by international and
domestic visitors (ICRT,2010).
Wildlife Tourism in Wales
The Welsh Government publishes annual social research reports on behalf of Visit Wales;
Visits to Tourist Attractions in Wales 2012 and Visits to Tourist Attractions in Wales 2013.
These reports outline statistics on different attraction categories for 2013, 2012 and 2011.
There are two categories which could potentially fall under wildlife tourism; “country park,
garden, other natural” (CP) and “wildlife attraction” (WL).
2013 2012 2011
Country park, garden, other natural 2,888,432 3,544,959 4,970,812
Wildlife attraction 684,526 297,393 824,504
Total (p/a)= 3,572,958 3,842,352 5,795,316
Table 1
6
2013 2012 20110
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
Country park, garden, other natural
Wildlife attraction
The graph is clearer than the table – make sure you label it and refer to it in the text
A Quarterly review of visitor numbers to these two categories indicates that the periods
April-June and July-September have the most significant number of visitors compared to the
rest of the year. This coincides with the start of the British summer and school holidays.
Simple calculations show the average footfall for these ‘nature attractions’ (over six years)
has been estimated at 4,093,198 visits. If the data from 2011 is removed due its ‘extreme’
values a more representative average can be calculated; this is considered to be 3,752,774
visits per annum. Furthermore, the percentage difference from the average can be calculated
(see table below) this gives insight into the ‘performance’ of a given year compared to the
average.
Type 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008
Country park,
garden, other
natural
2,888,43
2
3,544,95
9
4,970,81
2
3,373,27
1
3,611,37
1
3,327,09
5
Wildlife attraction 684,526 297,393 824,504 333,261 265,740 437,824
Total (p/a)=
3,572,95
83,842,35
2
5,795,31
6
3,706,53
2
3,877,11
1
3,764,91
9
incl.2011 ~-13% ~-6% ~+42% ~-9% ~-5% ~-8%
7
2013 2012 20110
1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
Country park, garden, other natural
Wildlife attraction
Graph 1
excl. 2011 ~-5% ~+2% ~+54% ~-2% ~+2% ~+0.5%
Table 2
The Visits to Tourist Attractions in Wales 2012 and 2013 list five nature reserves under CP.
Nnature reserves within Wales had a total of 171,519 visits In 2012 which accounts for just
over 4.5% of potential ‘wildlife tourism’, and 173,830 visits in 2013 accounting 4.6% of wildlife
tourism.
However this is a very small sample and is therefore unlikely to be representative of national
visits to reserves. The data from this report shows that Wales has a substantial demand for
nature/wildlife based tourism, it also shows that functional capacity of attractions is high.
Name of Reserve Hectares 2013 2012 2011
Conwy Nature
Reserve
TBC 76,649 72,837 88,996
Dingle Local
Nature Reserve
10 68,256 58,410 51,238
Gilfach Nature
Reserve & Visitor
Centre
165 1,982 1,786 N/A
Kenfig Nature
Reserve
700 12,165 20,877 24,002
RSPB Lake
Vyrnwy Nature
Reserve
TBC 14,778 17,609 N/A
Total(p/a)= 173,830 171,519
8
Table 3
Wildlife tourism as part of Welsh economy
Wildlife is part of the environment, and the environment with all its natural resources
contributes significantly to economies. A study conducted by the Countryside Council for
Wales and the National Trust in 2001 estimated that the environment contributes 9% of total
welsh GDP, supplying approximately £8.8 billion worth of goods and services. Additionally,
the environment accounted for 1 in 6 jobs in Wales equating to £1.8 billion in wages. The
value of wildlife-based activity to the Welsh economy was investigated by the Environment
Agency Wales (2007), and the final report found that there was a total output of £1,936 million
with a direct output value of £1,426 million. The report suggested that most of the output is
linked to conservation management, hospitality, retail and agricultural activities. Although
many of these have an economically important role in terms of the potential for ‘growth’ in
wildlife-related economic activity, it is most likely the wildlife tourism sector that plays the
largest role. Increased development of the wildlife tourism sector could have considerable
‘knock-on’ benefits, including increases in conservation activity and local employment,
particularly if it occurs in conjunction with investment in the protection and management of
Wales’ natural (and wildlife) resources.
Wildlife Tourism as a Growing Market
There is compelling evidence that there is incremental growth within the nature tourism
sector. The World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO, 2006) places this growth as being up to
20% per annum. Other literatures such as Curtin (2013) place this figure closer to 10%. This
growth is likely to be related to our increased awareness of environmental issues buffered
by increased coverage by the media. As our populations become more urbanised and
9
people’s relationship with nature becomes more diminished they are actively seeking trips
that put them back in touch with nature and wildlife. This has also led to a growing interest
in wildlife conservation and subsidiary activities such as gardening and wildlife photography
(Curtin, 2013). Anticipated growth in this market will require a strategic approach to its
management. Tourism managers need to consider what wildlife tourism is, who wildlife
tourists are and how different destinations can accommodate them. Although wildlife-related
activities may not be the sole purpose of a visit it provides a unique selling point for
attracting potential visitors .Effective management of this sector could potentially enhance
the existing domestic and international tourism product, as well as allow destinations to
differentiate themselves from others.
Harnessing the potential of wildlife tourism in North Wales
The success of a nature-based tourist location is dependent on two main factors; the quality
of the environment and the level of consumer service. Eagles (2002) suggest characteristics
which are important in driving this type of tourism includes; unique flora and fauna, diverse
natural features, and a diverse cultural heritage. Similarly, the ICRT (2010) believe the
successful development of the wildlife tourism industry in a particular area come down to a
few key points:
A variety of landscapes and habitats must be present and accessible
A diversity of wildlife species over the four seasons is paramount , with one or more
charismatic species being present all of or part of the year
A need for a few key sites with facilities, to attract the more casual wildlife viewer
such as young families
The need for public and private sectors to form partnerships to provide ancillary
services to tourists and day visitors
10
A management approach to future development that engages the public with wildlife
conservation
In addition to the above points a more business-like approach needs to be considered; a full
understanding of areas such as customer profile and expectations, product development,
supply and demand, management and marketing strategies will harness the potential of
wildlife tourism. In order for wildlife and environmental organisations to take a business-like
approach to their operations they need to fully understand their market and product. A key
figure for decision making in businesses is product volume, it is therefore essential that data
is thoroughly and effectively gathered. If this is done correctly then the product can be sold
in the right volumes at the right time to the right market; capitalising on potential income. In
order to achieve this many organisations including those centred around reserves and parks
may need to completely change their management structure; by moving away from a
government agency structure where there is a hierarchical form of decisions making to a
more parastatal management structure. Parastatals function like corporations within
government. This allows them to retain revenue from fees and licences, retain any budget
surplus at the end of the fiscal year, enforce pricing policies which better reflect the cost of
production, and allow for more flexible arrangements with corporate and non-profit entities
outside the government (Eagles, 2002).
Understanding the wildlife tourist profile and expectations
Before the development of a marketing programme aimed at consumers such as wildlife
tourists can be established. Wildlife tourism organisations should understand the typical
customer in that market –who are wildlife tourists? A profile should identify those
characteristics that explain the similarities and differences among consumers within every
segment; this can include demographic and psychographic variables (Taylor et al, 2013).
Understanding the consumer and different market segmentations should assist wildlife
11
tourism organisations in marketing their products and packages. Furthermore, to be able to
deliver to the customer and gain a competitive advantage organisations must understand
their customer expectations – what do they want? These two questions can only be achieved
through research using quantitative and qualitative methods.
Tourist Motivation
Consumers such as tourists generally make a decision to purchase a product either because
they ‘need’ it or because they ‘want’ it. It is therefore crucial to make a distinction between
the two; a need can be described as something simple that is essential for survival such as
food, drink, and shelter. Alternatively, a need can be more complicated especially when
considering psychological needs such as the need for affection, recognition, respect and
self esteem (Holloway, 2004). A want is something that is not essential to survival but can be
described as a luxury which can aid in satisfying certain impulses and our self esteem. The
two are not mutually exclusive; Maslow’s Hierarchy (Johnson and Thomas, 1994; Holloway,
2004) can help in understanding tourist motivations. His model theorises that there are
different categories of needs, and that people must satisfy more basic needs before an
arousal occurs to satisfy higher level needs. The hierarchy consists of five levels, at the
bottom the most basic level ‘psychological needs’ must first be satisfied before an individual
can move on to the next levels which become more complex further up the hierarchy; ‘safety
needs’, ‘social needs’, ‘ego needs’, and finally ‘self-actualisation’. Following the work of
Maslow more recent models of tourist/travel motivation have been conceptualised by
Pearce; travel career ladder (TCL) and travel career patterns (TCP). The TCL theory is similar
to Maslow’s hierarchy and consists of five different levels organised on a ‘ladder’; relaxation
needs, safety needs, relationship needs, self-esteem needs and self-actualisation/ fulfilment
12
needs which people feel the urge to satisfy. Pearce in 1988 theorises in his book The Ulysses
Factor, that individuals have a travel career and that their motives change according to their
life stage and accumulated travel experiences; some people will ascend the ladder whilst
others may remain at a particular level (Woodside, 2008; Ryan, 1998). Although tourist travel
motivation is a complex and multidimensional construct, understanding tourists’ needs and
wants is important when formulating an effective and efficient marketing plan. Furthermore,
it can have important implications for the management and development of the tourism
industry, especially in the areas of product/service planning, marketing communication and
visitor attraction and retention. Understanding tourist motivation is key to creating a
successful and sustainable wildlife tourism product that can provide social and economic
benefits which can have a positive impact on tourists, locals, wildlife and the environment.
Public willingness to pay for ecosystem services
An ecosystem is the interaction of living organisms and their environment including non-
living components such as air and water. In order to support human life; mankind must
utilise aspects of ecosystems such as water, food and medicines (Holden 2011). Boyd and
Banzhaf (2006) define ecosystem services as “components of nature, directly enjoyed,
consumed, or used to yield human well-being.” As human well-being relies so heavily on
ecosystem services; continuing to use them unsustainably would have negative
consequences for the future. Maintaining and restoring ecosystems and their services is
essential to sustainable economic growth (such as that of the nature tourism industry) and
general human well-being. However, such maintenance and restoration of the natural
environment is costly and it therefore logical that the consumers of these goods and
services, such as tourists at reserves and parks should contribute to its upkeep.
Traditionally government funding has provided the revenue for National parks and reserves
to carry out restoration and maintenance. With a decrease in government funding for
13
National parks and reserves; it is becoming increasingly important for organisations such as
NWWT to become ‘self-funded’, and seek revenue from the tourism industry, sale of
proceeds and external grants (White and Lovett, 1999). With tourists being a primary
‘consumer’ of national parks and reserves many management bodies are looking into
creating additional income by introducing recreational levies. This may cause some
considerable resistance from the public, as access to such areas in the UK has historically
been free. It is therefore important that the public are involved in future decision-making
within the environmental sector, especially when they may be required to pay for natural
resources used for recreational purposes. Such consultation with the public is important in
accessing willingness and preference of payment, in order to secure the future of
conservation. White and Lovett (1999) conducted a study about public willingness to pay in
the North York Moors National Park and found that highly valued habitats by visitors to the
Park were heather moorland and semi-natural broadleaved woodland, moorland primarily for
recreation and woodland primarily for nature conservation. Contingent valuation revealed
that whilst some people thought that increased revenue for the National Park should be
raised by the Park itself by making more productive use of the land, 97.9% of visitors said
they would be prepared to contribute 50p additional revenue towards annual maintenance in
the 11 National Parks for nature conservation. This proportion of people willing to pay
considerably dropped when the payment amount was increased and only 36.5% of visitors
said they would be willing to pay £200 per annum. This study shows that the majority of
people are willing to pay for the maintenance of reserves and parks which they use for
recreational purposes, and that the challenge would be in agreeing and implementing a price
for such goods and services. Organisations involved with the provision of ecosystem
services would need to understand the market to be able to come up with an appropriate
price value, and the public would need to be thoroughly consulted through the process of
any changes.
14
Benefits of Wildlife Tourism Industry
A growing wildlife tourism industry can have many benefits to people, wildlife and their
habitats (Curtin, 2008). Benefits include financial contribution which can aid conservation
work, socio-economic incentives, education, and psychological benefits from wildlife-human
interactions. Wildlife-based tourism activities can promote conservation values. For
example, first hand encounters with animals can create human empathy for them and make
individuals more willing to support their protection (Wilson and Tisdell, 2001). Additionally,
Bird (2007) suggests that watching wildlife can have a positive cognitive affect; such as
increasing knowledge and awareness, curiosity, pleasure, as well as a sense of privilege and
amazement which can all contribute to a positive mood over a long period of time. There are
potential economic benefits of wildlife tourism; revenue generated from wildlife tourism can
be reinvested into research and conservation ensuring the presence of wildlife and their
habitats in the future. The local economy can reap the benefits of a thriving wildlife tourism
industry; having a steady influx of wildlife enthusiasts can have positive impacts on local
businesses, especially those within the hospitality sector. With the wildlife tourism industry
growing at 10-20% per annum it should be able to support; (1) the continual growth, development,
and diversification of new products. (2) More employment opportunities. (3) Increase the use of
sustainable alternatives to mass tourism. (4) Justification and use of protected areas (MacLellan,
1999; ICRT, 2010).
Impacts of Wildlife Tourism Industry
Although wildlife tourism can be beneficial to both people and the environment (as seen above)
there are many impacts associated with the activities surrounding the industry. Habitats and species
can be negatively impacted from the mere presence of humans; and these impacts are often site
and species specific. Anthropogenic activities can disrupt certain animal behaviours such as
foraging and feeding young, disturbance of parental behaviours, habitat alteration and food
15
provisioning. It is easy to see that wildlife tourism activities have the potential to destroy the
foundation of the industry itself. Therefore, it is essential that the industry is appropriately and
sustainably managed to reap the benefits related with the industry whilst mitigating any potential
impacts. To achieve this the following would need to be influenced; the amount and type of visitor
use, the location of visitor use, and visitor behaviour. As Curtin (2013) observes a great amount of
strategic thinking and decision making from key stakeholders would be needed within the tourism
industry, along with a thorough understanding of consumer motivation, expectations, and
behaviours .
The Marketing mix
As previously stated, understanding tourist motivation at a local level is highly important in
the creation of products and packages, and how they are marketed to the consumer. In the
case of tourism it is unusual that one product will suit all consumers, it is therefore
important for stakeholders within the wildlife tourism industry to ensure that the optimal
marketing mix is achieved for their products. The marketing mix is defined by Kotler and
Armstrong (1994) as “the set of controllable, tactical marketing tools that the firm blends to
produce the response it wants in the target market”. There are four main elements to
consider in the marketing mix known as the ‘4 Ps’; product, price, promotion and place.
Organisations should integrate these elements in order to maximise the impact of their
product and services on the customers, and to increase customers’ satisfaction (Analoui
and Karami, 2003). The product is what is actually delivered to the consumer and can be
both tangible and intangible. NWWT products include their reserves which encompass a range of
16
habitats and wildlife, as well as activities which are run by their staff such as guided walks and
educational talks. Price refers to the amount of money which is paid by the consumer for
goods and services (such as ecosystem services provided by national parks and reserves),
this could include the price of membership at NWWT, or entrance fees to events and sites run by
NWWT; it can often impact on the decision of the consumer to buy the goods and services
on offer, and the consumer is usually looking to obtain the best value for money between a
range of competitive products. Place represents the point of sale and where it can be
delivered through distribution channels to the consumer, NWWT’s distribution channels are
their website and office branches. Promotion is considered at the avenues of communication
between the seller and potential customer, or rather how the consumer is persuaded to buy
the goods and services. As described above the marketing mix is consumer orientated, and
as a result Kotler et al (1999) proposed that the Four P’s should become the Four C’s to reflect
this; customer value, cost, convenience and communication. Customer value means the
perceived benefits provided to meet the needs and wants, quality of service received and the
value for money delivered assessed against the competition. Cost is the consumer-focused
equivalent to price which is a supply-side decision; this is also assessed against the
competition. Convenience refers to the ease of consumer access to the products they buy.
Communication refers to all avenues of dialogue between the producer and customer not
just sales persuasion (Fyall and Garrod, 2005). Regardless of whether an organisation uses
the 4 Ps or 4 Cs as their marketing tool it is clear that achieving a balance between the four
elements is key to effective marketing, and critical in gaining a competitive edge in the
market place, this can be illustrated using Bowman’s Strategy Clock (see figure 1).
Bowman’s Strategy Clock
As the tourism market is a customer focused industry
with a great amount of competitors it is important
nature tourism businesses and organisations to
consider its strategic position within the market.
17
Figure 1
Bowman’s Strategy Clock outlines eight competitive positions which business can take to
differentiate themselves from competitors in the marketplace. Two key factors in a business’
position on the clock is the perceived value of the product to the consumer, and the price of
the product. Businesses risk losing their market share if the perceived value to the customer
is low and the price of the product is too high. Therefore, many business’ strategic position
lie between one and five on Bowman’s strategy clock, allowing sufficient differentiation in
product and price to gain a competitive edge in the market place. Lovett (1999) saw a
correlation in people’s willingness to pay for access to national parks and price; with the proportion
of people willing to pay reducing with increasing price. For NWWT to gain a substantial market
share of the wildlife tourism industry it would be in their interest to place themselves between two
and five on the clock. At these positions the perceived value of the product to the consumer is high
while the price is kept low. These strategies will ensure a loyal customer base with high return
visitations.
Porter’s five forces
Porter’s five forces was created to understand the attractiveness and potential profitability of
an industry through understanding competitive forces which may act on it. Michael Porter
18
suggested that nature and intensity of competition within an industry was a result of
interactions between five key forces (Wilson and Gilligan, 2012):
1. Threat of new entrants
2. The power of buyers
3. The threat of substitutes
4. The extent of competitive rivalry
5. The power of suppliers
Porter’s model suggests that the stronger the force,
the more limiting it is to an organisation. A strong
competitive force can be regarded as a threat
because it restricts profits, while a weak competitive
force is seen as an opportunity (Hill, C and Jones,
2011). An attractive industry will have little
competitive rivalry, few threats of substitutes and
new entrants, and low bargaining power amongst
buyers and suppliers. An unattractive industry will
have a high amount of competitive rivalry,
substantial and continual threats from substitutes and new entrants, and suppliers and
buyers will hold a high bargaining power (Schermerhorn, 2009).If an organisation can
understand the forces which act on them they can develop a business-like strategy to reduce
their vulnerability or take advantage of the market place (Ahlstrom, D and Bruton,G,2009).
Strategies which can be implemented include; a differentiation strategy, a cost leadership
strategy, and a focused strategy. A differentiation strategy offers a product that is unique
and different to the competition. A cost leadership strategy seeks to gain a competitive
advantage by offering a product that operates at lower costs. A focused strategy aims at
19
Figure 2
offering a product to a specific market segment, with the objective of serving its needs better
than any other product on the market (Schermerhorn, 2009). A focused strategy can take two
forms; focused differentiation strategy and focused cost leadership strategy, the former
offering a specialised product to a specific market segment, the latter offering a low cost
product to a specific market segment. The wildlife tourism industry in North Wales could be
considered to be a very attractive industry as it small but growing up to 20% ,as stated by
the UNTWO (2006) and Curtin (2013). There is little competition in the local area, competition
mostly comes from places such as Scotland and Yorkshire, therefore limiting the power of
buyers. There are few business that operate in specifically or exclusively in wildlife tourism ,
and therefore competitive rivalry is low. This could possibly allow for threat of substitutes
and new entrants to be problem, this would not be an initial problem but would potentially
occur after the establishment of wildlife tourism industry in the local area. Wildlife tourism
operators would need to adapt a strategy that suits their product, and be adaptive to changes
in the market to stay ahead of the competition and be successful in the future.
20
Methodology
As tThe objective of this research is to gather information on tourist profiles, motivations, and
economic expendituretourist social and economic behaviours during their visit, two approaches
will be used, with the view of accessing who wildlife tourists are and whether they would be willing
to pay for access to nature, such as on a NWWT reserve. In order to evaluate the social and
economic benefits of non-consumptive Wildlife Tourism within North Wales, two approaches will be
used. Firstly a survey will be undertaken to get an insight into the amount and type of people that
visit wildlife sites and attractions locally, as well as how much they spend during their visit and on
what.a semi structured interview will be done in order to gain a better understanding of NWWTs
views on the tourism industry within the area. Secondly, a semi structured interview will be done in
order to gain a better understanding of NWWTs views on the tourism industry within the area. a
survey will be undertaken to get an insight into the amount and type of people that visit wildlife sites
and attractions locally, as well as how much they spend during their visit and on what.By using two
approaches it is thought that the data gathered will be able to answer the research question using
different perspectives and information, and therefore subsequent findings will be more
representative than when using one approach.
Quantitative on site survey: Anglesey Sea Zoo
21
Quantitative research allows for data to be collected and then analysed statically. It can be
described as descriptive research used to gather factual information about what is happening in the
marketplace, when it’s happening, where it’s happening, how it’s happening and to whom
(Holloway, 2004). The emphasis of this research is on the sample size, representiveness of the
sample, and the answers of the respondents (Callingham, 2004). Quantitative research is good at
describing differences between respondents. However, the rigidity of the questions asked, means
this research method is unable to describe why these differences have occurred.
A survey composed of close-ended questions will be undertaken at Anglesey Sea Zoo to gather
numerical data from a sample population of wildlife tourists. Convenience sampling will be used in
order to gain the highest amount of respondents possible. Convenience sampling is a non-random
technique based on the judgement of the researcher, where a sample of the population is chosen
as they are readily available, nearby, or willing to participate (Black, 2011). In order to achieve the
sample size, collection of the survey participants will be undertaken at the entrance to the sites
inviting people to participate. This sampling technique is chosen due to cost and time restraints of
this research. The survey will consist of 12 questions which will be asked face-to-face with interview
time lasting approximately 3 minutes, the questions collect information on visitor demographics,
spending patterns, and categorical information about their wildlife experiences/views (full details of
the questionnaire can be seen in the appendix I).
Anglesey sea zoo is a wildlife attraction, and therefore the data which will be collected could be
considered biased as it may only collect data from a sample of the population that has visited the
attraction, and by default a segment of the population that is already interested in wildlife. However,
the information collected at this location will give insight into the existing wildlife tourist clientele in
the local and surrounding area.
22
Qualitative semi-structured interview Questionnaire with Rob Booth and Nia Jones from
NWWT
Qualitative research focuses on the collection and interpretation of words rather than
numbers. Researchers using qualitative methods often become much more engaged with
their informants than with quantitative methods. This method is particularly useful in
understanding people’s patterns of behaviour, experiences and feelings (Holloway, 2004).
Benefits of qualitative research include flexibility and responsiveness to changing conditions in the
study area. It is particularly effective during interviews where open ended questions are used, as it
allows for the interviewer to adapt their questions in response to answers given by the interviewee
allowing for a more in-depth interview and richer findings (Callingham, 2004). Disadvantages of
qualitative research include the lack of ‘scientific methods’ which in turn often leads to the findings
of qualitative research being questioned and critiqued. However the nature of qualitative research
is appropriate when trying to understand different perspectives and opinions of a small sample size,
such as those within the wildlife tourism industry. Therefore, qualitative research and the way it
accesses views of the target population is often the catalyst for more in depth and representative
studies being carried out.
In order to gain a stakeholder perspective of Wildlife Tourism within North Wales, a semi
structured interviews will be undertaken with Rob Booth the Living Landscapes officer, and Nia
Jones the Marine Awareness officer. The NWWT website states “Rob works in partnership with
a wide range of stakeholders to develop the Trust’s work with Living Landscapes. In
particular he oversees and co-ordinates the management of Trust nature reserves (including
Gwaith Powdwr) and develops the role of Trust nature reserves in Conwy and Gwynedd as
key components of an ecological network. He aims to encourage community members local
to our nature reserves to become supporters of the Wildlife Trust”. Nia Jones’ role is
described as “Nia increases local community awareness, understanding and involvement in
23
marine conservation issues. She does this through articles and interviews to support various
publicity campaigns; promoting community involvement in the delivery of marine and coastal Local
Biodiversity Action Plans; creating public support for national campaigns such as WT’s Marine Bill
Campaign, and Marine Week; assisting in the development of awareness and education resources;
managing and co-ordinating volunteers and volunteer projects; and preparing applications for
funding/grants”. Although it would be better to interview senior representatives of NWWT as their
perspectives would carry more weight; Rob’s and Nia’s interviews should reflect the different roles
they play in their respective fields of terrestrial and marine ecology/conservation, producing different
but complimentary data. The aim of both interviews is to gain insight into the views and professional
opinions of key staff at NWWT in regards to the wildlife tourism industry in North Wales. Open
ended questions will be used to gain this information, allowing for a broader context of
discussion. The questions are seen below:
1. How would you describe the typical visitor to your site/event?
2. What do you think is a strong motivator for their visit?
3. Do you think the public would be willing to pay for access to your sites? If so how would you
implement/collect? Could you see any resultant drawbacks/benefits of charging visitors?
4. Could you describe how you view the wildlife tourism industry in North Wales (Strengths/
Opportunities, and Threats/Weaknesses):
5. What in your opinion is the key to securing the future of a healthy wildlife tourism industry in
North Wales?
Quantitative on site survey: Anglesey Sea Zoo
Quantitative research allows for data to be collected and then analysed statically. It can be
described as descriptive research used to gather factual information about what is
happening in the marketplace, when it’s happening, where it’s happening, how it’s
happening and to whom (Holloway, 2004). The emphasis of this research is on the sample
24
size, representiveness of the sample, and the answers of the respondents (Callingham,
2004). Quantitative research is good at describing differences between respondents.
However, the rigidity of the questions asked, means this research method is unable to
describe why these differences have occurred.
A survey will be undertaken at Anglesey to gather numerical data from a sample population.
Convenience used in order to gain the .
Convenience sampling is a non-random technique based on the judgement of the
researcher, where a sample of the population is chosen as they are readily available, nearby,
or willing to participate. In order to achieve the sample size, collection of the survey
participants will be undertaken at the entrance to the sites inviting people to participate.
This sampling technique is chosen due to cost and time restraints of this research. The
survey will consist of 12 questions which will be asked face-to-face with interview time
lasting approximately 3 minutes
Anglesey sea zoo is a wildlife attraction, and therefore data collected here could be
considered biased as it only collects data from a sample of the population that has visited
the attraction, and by default are already interested in wildlife. However, the information
collected at this location gives insight into the existing wildlife tourist clientele in the local
and surrounding area.
25
Results
Quantitative Questionnaire at Anglesey Sea zoo:
The survey was carried out on the 17th of August 2014 at Anglesey Sea Zoo. 20 questionnaires
were printed, one of which was given to the Manager. After a short discussion with one of the staff it
was decided that the best place to survey the visitors would be the foyer just before the gift shop
and cafe, approximately half way round the site. A this point convenience sampling was used , and
passing visitors were asked if they would be interested in sparing 3 minutes of their time to answer
questions about wildlife tourism. It is important to note that people visited Anglesey Sea Zoo in
groups, and therefore one person filled out the questionnaire through consultation and on behalf of
the rest of the group. 19 questionnaires were successfully completed, this represents the views of
19 groups (respondents), in total information was gathered on the individuals within the groups,
representing the experiences and views of 64 people.
26
10
2
4
6
8
10
How Many People are there in your Party
People per Group
Res
po
nse
s
Most visitors at Anglesey Sea Zoo were part of a group, findings show that 100% of respondents (19) travelled in groups, approximately 82% travelled in groups consisting of between three and five people. Within the 19 groups there were a total of 64 individuals.
<3 4-8yrs 9-13yrs 14-17yrs
18-24yrs
25-34yrs
35-44yrs
45-54yrs
55-64yrs
65-74yrs
75+yrs0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Ages of Visitors
Age groups
Am
ou
nt
Graph 3 shows that the majority of visitors were middle-aged independent adults between the ages
of twenty five and forty four, and young dependent children under the age of thirteen. Older people
were under represented with only three individuals over the age of fifty five.
27
Graph 2
Graph 3
Walk Cycle Bus Train Car Motorcycle02468
101214161820
Transport Used
Mode of Travel
Res
po
nse
s
Graph 4 shows that all respondents travelled to the site by car.
Do you live locally
Yes
No
Approximately 95% of the respondents did not live locally. Below is a map of where
respondents reside, one respondent withheld information, therefore only eighteen
locations are on the map.
28
Graph 4
Graph 5
Map 1
The map was created using postcodes inputted into batchgeo. The map can be accessed at:
http://batchgeo.com/map/f1c08132aa0625b8117e7772a5c48ad5
Only two respondents lived within Wales itself. Sixteen respondents lived outside of Wales, fifteen of
which resided in England and one in Germany. The map shows a high density of locations in the
North West, with a clear belt of respondents living between the areas of Preston and Birmingham.
The belt is approximately 110 miles long and runs parallel to the M6. Eleven of the respondents
lived on this belt, representing 61%. Only three respondents lived in the south of England,
representing 17% of the population.
Staying in accomodation overnight that is not your own
Yes
No
The pie chart above shows that, 79% of respondents to the survey, stayed in accommodation
overnight that was not their own.
29
Graph 5
Findings show the range of different types of accommodation stayed in by the visitors overnight.
Fifteen of the nineteen groups stayed in accommodation that was not their own, which represents
79% of the population. Just over a third of all respondents stayed at a campsite. Self Catering and
hotel accommodation were also popular choices for overnight stays. Staying at a B&B or with
family/friends were the least common responses. Finally, zero respondents stayed at a hostel.
£318.00
£243.00
£653.00
£331.00
£10.00
Spending Patterns
Travel
Food & Drink
Accomodation
Leisure Activities
Other
The total spend on the 19 groups was £1555 across the five categories. Accommodation accounted
for around 42% (~£10.20 pp) of total respondent spend, followed by leisure activities at 21%(~£5.10
pp) and travel at 20%(~£4.85 pp), then food and drink at 16% (~£3.89 pp), and finally 1%
30
Campsite B&B Hotel Hostel Self Catering With Family/Friends
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Accomodation Stayed inR
esp
on
ses
Graph 7
(~£0.24pp) of total spend was categorised as ‘other’. This is equal to around £82 per group, or an
average of £24.29 per person for the day.
Wildlife Interest
No interest
Passing interest
Casual interest
Serious/dedicated interest
74% of visitors considered their wildlife interests as casual, 16% had a serious/dedicated interest,
and 10% only had a passing interest in wildlife.
13
16
1515
16
9
Agreement Statements
Countryside Escapism
Traditional Coastal Trip
Wildlife Watching
Activities Orientated
Cultural and Sightseeing
Nostalgic
Respondents were asked which statements they agreed with in regards to their visit to North Wales,
details can be seen in the Appendix.
31
Graph 8
Graph 9
Six statements were put forward and respondents were asked to select all statements that applied
to them. A total of 84 agreement statements were gathered, the number of agreements for each
category can be seen in the pie chart. Visitors agreed the reason for their visit to North Wales was
mostly for a traditional coastal trip and/or cultural and sightseeing trip, both categories had a total of
sixteen positive agreements, equating to 19% each. Wildlife watching and activities orientated
reasons for visiting North Wales both had a total of fifteen positive agreements, equal to 18% each,
making them the second most popular reasons for visitation. Countryside escapism and nostalgic
trips were the least agreed with statements, at thirteen (15%) and nine (11%) respectively.
Qualitative Semi-Structured Interview Questionnaires
Two separate interview questionnaires were conducted with Rob Booth and Nia Jones from NWWT;
the questionnaires were distributed via email on the 7th of November 2014.
Rob’s responses to the interview questions can be seen below:
1. How would you describe the typical visitor to your site/event? “This is a tough question, as it
depends on the site and / or event in question. A typical visitor to Gwaith Powdwr at the
moment is a local adult dog walker, sometimes with their kids. However, if it’s an event like a
bat or nightjar walk then it might be someone from further afield who’s travelled an hour and
is very interested in wildlife. Equally, if you look at other sites like Rhiwledyn (Little Orme),
the average visitor would probably be 40 – 70 years old, wanting to walk over the public
footpath to Angel or Penrhyn Bay for the exercise and the views. They would be mostly
local, but in the summer you get quite a few tourists in the area.”
2. What do you think is a strong motivator for their visit? “Factors would include exercise,
interest in wildlife, dog walking, accessibility, free of charge.”
3. Do you think the public would be willing to pay for access to your sites? If so how would you
implement/collect? Could you see any resultant drawbacks/benefits of charging visitors?
32
“No, I don’t think they would be willing to pay. Most of our sites don’t have the infrastructure
(parking, toilets, café) or the consistent wildlife spectacle (e.g. a number of different bird
hides with year round views of unusual species) to justify payment and we don’t have the
staff available to collect money. However, we could acquire or develop a reserve with these
attributes. Cemlyn would be one possibility, but the main wildlife spectacle is restricted to the
spring / early summer tern colony. I would suggest a carpark with automated ticket machine
would be the best solution, staffing it is just very expensive.”
4. Could you describe how you view the wildlife tourism industry in North Wales (Strengths/
Opportunities, and Threats/Weaknesses):
“Strengths: big variety of habitats in a small area; accessible from the Midlands and North-
west cities of England; wide variety of accommodation; species diversity. Weaknesses: not
promoted enough; poor facilities on sites; lack of information; poorly funded conservation
organisations; weather. Opportunities: promotion; improve facilities (parking, toilets, paths,
hides, information); proper protection of key sites. Threats: climate change (wildlife will move
so existing sites may become worthless); urban development; pollution; competition.”
5. What in your opinion is the key to securing the future of a healthy wildlife tourism industry in
North Wales? “I would say it is government support through funding initiatives to help the
wildlife sector, e.g. promoting Wales as a wildlife destination much as Scotland does
successfully. If the public and government were better informed about how much wildlife
contributes to the economy then conservation and wildlife tourism would go up the political
agenda and get the recognition they deserve.”
Nia’s responses to the interview questions can be seen below:
33
1. How would you describe the typical visitor to your site/event? “My events differ quite a lot
based on what kind of event it is however I would say that typically, in an average summer
season of events, participants are families with primary school aged kids. Some local
however mostly visitors on holiday, generally camping/caravanning and quite a few have
their own caravans which are based up here and so visit the area regularly.”
2. What do you think is a strong motivator for their visit? “Visit to events I would say something
to do during the summer holidays.”
3. Do you think the public would be willing to pay for access to your sites? If so how would you
implement/collect? Could you see any resultant drawbacks/benefits of charging visitors?
“Not applicable to me as I don’t have a site which I warden.”
4. Could you describe how you view the wildlife tourism industry in North Wales (Strengths/
Opportunities, and Threats/Weaknesses): “Strengths: The natural landscape and its
associated wildlife. Opportunities: To promote and market the area as a great place to enjoy
and see wildlife (can in some cases extend the tourist season).Threats: Industrialisation of
coastal waters, offshore wind farms and other marine renewable energies detract from the
perception of the sea and coastal environment as a “wild” place which is one of its main
attraction as tourist destination (This is my personal opinion). Weaknesses: Lack of
marketing of the opportunities that North Wales has to offer in terms of wildlife tourism. Lack
of consideration given to wildlife tourism in national tourism strategies.”
5. What in your opinion, is the key to securing the future of a healthy wildlife tourism industry in
North Wales? “Protection of the natural environment & better marketing on a strategic level.”
It is clear that the research findings from the two different approaches have gathered data which is
both informative and complimentary. The results will be examined and analysed in the next chapter.
Discussion
34
In order to address the research question, and understand the social and economic behaviours of
wildlife tourists; firstly findings of the survey will be discussed, followed by a discussion about the
interviews conducted with NWWT. This will now be examined with reference to literature and similar
studies, to ascertain whether wildlife visitors could indeed provide revenue for NWWT.
The survey carried out Anglesey Sea Zoo gathered information on visitor demographics,
motivations and spending patterns.
Visitor Demographics (Profile):
Visitors to Anglesey Sea Zoo (ASZ) were primarily independent middle aged adults between the
ages of twenty five and forty four, and young children under thirteen years of age. Fredline (2001)
found that 56% of adult wildlife tourists were in this age bracket but had no data on children. Blake
et al (2010) found that 31% of overnight tourists and 22% of day visitors were part of this age
category, and young children accounted for 10% and 14% respectively. Figures show that the
majority of visitors travelled in groups, and these groups were primarily families consisting of three
to five members. The ICRT (2010) and Blake et al (2010) similarly found that most people visiting
wildlife destinations in Yorkshire were also part of a family group. The results also showed that all
respondents travelled to Anglesey Sea Zoo by car, and that 95% did not live locally, with the
majority of visitors coming from the North West of England, and only one respondent coming from
overseas. Statistics published by the ONS suggest that the British public are increasingly choosing
to spend their holiday within the UK, known as a ‘staycation’. This trend is likely to be a result of the
current economic climate (recession) and the reduction of disposable income, combined with an
increase in environmental awareness and extensive media coverage of environmental and
conservation issues (Curtin,2013). Furthermore, 79% of respondents stayed in accommodation
overnight that was not their own, with camping being the most common form of accommodation
being used. This suggests that people are willing to travel to North Wales for the purpose of wildlife
tourism, this is also evident in the statics published by Visit Wales who found that between 2008
and 2013 an average of 3,700,000 visits are made to wildlife tourism destinations specifically in
35
Wales; these destinations fall into two categories “country park, garden, other natural”(CP) and
“wildlife attraction”(WL). This is further backed by the results of the survey, as the majority of
visitors were not local but stayed overnight, suggesting there was strong motivation for choosing
North Wales (and ASZ) as a tourist destination. Additionally, visitors being able to travel long
distances and stay overnight suggests a certain amount of affluence regardless of the recession, as
they were able to fund a ‘staycation’. The collection of demographic data is important as it can give
insight into particular market segments, and therefore can be influential in marketing wildlife tourism
products. This research could have benefited by also collecting data on the gender of visitors and
their average house hold income so that more correlations could have been drawn upon. For
example; the type of accommodation could have been influenced by the amount of wealth in a
group, and having figures on gender could have allowed for further segmentation of the sector.
Motivations:
The majority of visitors described themselves as having a ‘casual interest’ in wildlife, and can be
described as exhibiting a keen interest in seeing wildlife whilst on holiday (Blake et al, 2010). The
survey complimented this with data collected from the agreement statements; with traditional
coastal, cultural and sightseeing, wildlife, and activities trips being common reasons for their
visitation. These types of trips are often spent outdoors, and tourists often come into contact with
wildlife as a result of the activities undertaken on these types of excursions. Additionally, results
show that camping is the most utilised form of overnight accommodation, and can itself be
considered an activity which allows people to experience the environment and its wildlife at close
quarters. This evidence implies that people are highly motivated to come to North Wales and
immerse themselves with all facets of the natural environment in order to fulfil a set of needs, such
as those described by Maslow’s Hierarchy. This reverberates observations made by Curtin (2013);
that as our populations become more urbanised, people’s relationship with nature becomes more
diminished, and as a result they are actively taking trips and holidays which put them back in touch
with nature and wildlife. This represent an opportunity for NWWT as these types of visitors may not
be familiar with the natural environment and could benefit from interpretation and guidance. Results
36
of the survey show that 61% of participants lived in a belt between Preston and Birmingham, the
locations are in urbanised areas running parallel to the M6, which is in keeping with Curtin’s
observation. Other reports such as that carried out by VisitBritain (2004) also found that the
opportunity to see wildlife was a prominent motivator for tourist travel. Literature sources put a
great deal of emphasis on the importance of understanding the motivations of tourists, and the
similarities and differences within each market segment, including travel decisions and choice of
destination. Pearce (1988) theorises that peoples motives for travel change according to their life
stage and accumulated travel experiences. For wildlife tourism to be harnessed to its full potential
by organisations within the industry, a comprehensive understanding of tourist motivations is
essential so that products can be developed and marketed correctly, and sold at the optimal price
and volume to suit the target population.
Spending patterns:
To begin to calculate the value of wildlife tourism in North Wales requires an understanding of
spending patterns of tourists and visitors to the area. Results of the survey at ASZ estimate that
tourists visiting wildlife attractions spend on average £24.29 per person. This estimate is
comparable to findings of other studies; the ICRT (2010) found the average spend associated with
wildlife tourism in Eastern Yorkshire was £52.82 per person, VisitEngland (2006) found the average
spend per person per leisure day trip was £25.02, and Yorkshire Wildlife Trust found that visitors to
their reserves spent on average £12.54 per head. Calculating the mean of these three sources
give an average of £30.13 per person per wildlife orientated trip, which is not too dissimilar to the
survey findings. The breakdown of visitor spend shows that the biggest expenditure made by
tourists was on accommodation at approximately £10.20 per person per day, followed by spending
on leisure activities at £5.10, travel at £4.85 (which would have solely been the cost of fuel as 100%
of visitors travelled by car), food and drink at £3.89, and ‘other’ only accounting for £0.24. It is
important to capture the spending patterns of wildlife tourists from a marketing perspective, so that
37
the correct marketing mix can be achieved ensuring maximum impact of products and services on
potential customers.
The semi-structured interviews collected perspectives and opinions of wildlife professionals, giving
important insight into the industry which cannot be collected using quantitative methods. Information
collected during the interview indicates that a typical visitor to wildlife sites/attractions in the local
area is dependent on the season and the site/event in question. However, during the summer which
is the peak season for wildlife tourism, the typical visitors are families with primary school aged
children. This is in keeping with other literature and the results of the survey carried out at ASZ. For
example, the ICRT (2010) found that 55% of visitors across three study sites in Yorkshire were ‘with
family’, and Blake et al (2010) found that 59% of overnight tourists and 63% of day visitors travelled
with family. The findings of the survey at ASZ complements this showing that most visitors were in
groups of three to five people , and the majority of people were middle aged adults or children under
the age of thirteen. It would have been beneficial to ask participants a categorical question on who
they were visiting with to highlight this further. However, looking at the raw data it is clear that most
visits were made by family groups.
During the interview apart from an interest in wildlife, accessibility was described as being a strong
motivator for tourists; with emphasis being on free admissions, and an ‘activity’ to do during the
summer holidays. This backs up the results of the survey as 100% of visitors had a degree of
interest in wildlife, with the majority categorising themselves as having a casual interest. The
agreement statements also suggest that visits to the area were related to taking part in ‘stimulating’
activities such as cultural/sightseeing, traditional coastal, activities orientated (walking, cycling,
canoeing etc) and wildlife watching. The time of year the survey was carried out in may have biased
the results, as it was in the middle of the summer holidays; it would therefore be advantageous to
survey people at other times of year. Conducting multiple surveys at different times of the year
could show if people’s motivations change; for example, during different seasons. Outside the
summer holidays visitor demographics could be completely different and this could affect visitor
motivations. The survey at ASZ showed that people over the age of fifty five were
38
underrepresented, this in theory could change to a much higher percentage at other times of year,
and depending on where these visitors are on their travel career ladder motivations for their travel
could also change: further studies would be needed to explore this. Due to the time constraints of
this research only two interviews were conducted (although ASZ were approached but did not
respond),conducting a variety of interviews with wildlife tourism stakeholders would have been more
beneficial, as a variety of perspectives could have been drawn upon giving a more balanced view of
the wildlife tourism industry. An awareness of tourist motivations is crucial when developing a
market plan, and has important implication for the management and development of wildlife tourism
products and packages. It is especially central to areas such as product/service planning, marketing
communication and visitor attraction/retention.
It is apparent that visitors are highly motivated to travel to this specific area of the UK over other
popular and thriving wildlife areas such as Scotland. This suggests that there is an existing market
for wildlife tourism in North Wales, although perhaps currently smaller and less well known than
other destinations. The stunning coastal and mountain landscapes of the area are most likely
responsible for this. With North Wales being home to a variety of habitats and species; it is
important to maintain, protect and restore all habitats which as a result of their vulnerability, could
be determinately affected by increasing visitor numbers. However, this level of attentiveness
requires revenue to be generated by organisations which manage our ecosystem services such as
NWWT, and with government and private grants becoming harder to secure, these organisations
must look for alternative income streams. One alternative could potentially be through the wildlife
tourism industry, and charging an entrance fee to visitors at sites and attractions. Rob booth at
NWWT was asked for his opinion on whether the public would be willing to pay for access to site; he
believed that the public would not be willing to pay for access to the NWWT sites in particular due to
their lack of facilities and year-round wildlife viewing opportunities. He also stated that collection of
payment would in itself present a challenge to NWWT, as they do not have the staff, and therefore
looking into an automated payment method such a ticket machine in a car park would be more
feasible. This does not concur with previous studies and literature. For example, White and Lovett
39
(1999) found that 97.9% of visitors to the North York Moors National Park would in fact be willing to
pay towards the parks maintenance, and that people’s willingness to pay had a direct relationship
with price, being that their willingness decreased with increasing prices. Therefore, the challenge
would be on setting an agreeable price where the optimum amount of revenue could be achieved
without compromising on the quality of products and services. This is important when considering
the market mix, as high prices could drive people away affecting visitor attraction and retention, and
low prices (although likely to attract visitors) may not be sufficient enough to cover the costs of
management and maintenance of wildlife sites and attractions. Achieving a balance is essential as
there is statistical evidence in between total direct income and visitor numbers (Tye & Gordon,
1995), this presents a paradigm where sites with more revenue are better managed, and better
managed sites attract more visitors. A barrier to setting and implementing an entrance fee for
wildlife sites and attractions, (especially those directly associated with the natural environment, such
as a NWWT reserve) is that access to these types of sites has historically been free in the UK.
Consequently, achieving an optimal price would require further market research and consultation
with stakeholders including the general public, so that proposed pricing policies would be met with
the least resistance allowing for the most success.
The NWWT staff were also asked about their views on the current wildlife tourism industry for North
Wales. Both interviewees agreed that its strength was down to a large variety of landscapes; which
encompasses a diversity of habitats and landscapes. Rob Booth also described the area as having
a range of different accommodation options, and being easily accessible from the Midlands and
North-West cities of England, this view highlight the findings of the survey that 61% of respondents
lived between Preston and Birmingham parallel to the M6. Opportunities were considered to be
improving facilities and promotion, this is linked to the paradigm described previously, and that
having improved facilities could potentially attract market segments previously unreached. For
example, the low visitor figures on people over the age of fifty five could be improved if they were
provided facilities such as toilets, and somewhere they could sit, eat, and warm up. Similarly
improved promotion could increase the amount of day and overnight visitations to the area by both
40
domestic and international tourists. This again links back to the visitor-revenue paradigm; increased
visitor numbers could considerably boost income revenue, increased revenue can positively impact
the wildlife tourism industry through better funding of areas such as management, education and
conservation. These opportunities also represent the current weaknesses of wildlife tourism in
North Wales; additionally Nia Jones suggests that the lack of consideration given to wildlife tourism
in national tourism strategies is another weakness. The purpose of these strategies is to; 1) provide
guidance to planning authorities to help secure growth in the visitor economy, 2) highlight future
opportunities for investment and development to all councils and other stakeholders, 3) promote
actions needed to support growth in a structured and consistent manner (VisitScotland). This lack of
consideration and backing by councils/government could potentially be stunting the growth of the
industry, and with the correct support wildlife tourism could have the potential to grow beyond the
10-20% figures stated by Curtin (2013) and UNTWO. Threats to the wildlife tourism industry include
climate change; a big change in the local climate could render key wildlife sites worthless as the
wildlife may move. Urban development, including the industrialisation of coastal waters could also
make the area less appealing as it detracts from the perception that the area is a ‘wild’ place.
Competition from other wildlife destination hotspots could also represent potential threat to the local
wildlife tourism industry. The success of wildlife tourism industry in North Wales is dependent on the
mitigation of these weaknesses and threats. The North Wales market needs to differentiate itself
from other wildlife destinations, and needs to employ the right strategies to gain a competitive edge,
such as those defined by Bowman’s strategy clock and Porter’s five forces. Furthermore, it is the
opinions of the staff at NWWT that the key to securing the future of a healthy wildlife tourism
industry locally is through government support and funding, including the promotion of North Wales
as a wildlife destination. In addition, better communication between the government and
stakeholders within the wildlife tourism industry could also highlight the economic importance of
wildlife, and move it up the political agenda by increasing the perceived value of wildlife tourism and
conservation.
Conclusion
41
Wildlife Tourism has the potential to significantly contribute to local incomes and employment, and is
a valuable resource for satisfying basic human wants and needs. Capturing and understanding
visitor motivations and spending patterns are important from an economic perspective. With this
knowledge wildlife tourism ‘operators’, such as NWWT, can capitalise on making products and
services which complement wildlife tourist wants and needs. Further research about visitor
motivations and expectations would be beneficial in order to establish a strategic plan for the
development of Wildlife Tourism in North Wales. Although, taking a market led approach would
significantly increase the economic impact of wildlife tourism, as tourists would feel a sense of
temptation and satisfaction at the goods and services on offer, increasing revenue through the
amount they spend, and importantly the likelihood of a return visit. The future and success of wildlife
tourism in North Wales is dependent on creating an appealing brand image, which can only be
achieved through; drawing from a variety of sectors, continual research, promotion and marketing,
and an adaptive management strategy.
Considerations and Recommendations
Although North Wales has unique landscapes similar to Scotland it is not well marketed to the
consumer and therefore receives less interest. Local stakeholders should therefore focus on two
main strategies: development of facilities, and increased marketing efforts. Wildlife sites in the area
are generally lacking in services and facilities and it would be advantageous to improve/develop
them as it would attract a larger range of visitors. Increasing public interest in local wildlife tourism
products through better marketing of existing attractions as well as proposed developments is vital.
In addition, an increase in marketing and promotion at national and local levels could significantly
increase visitation to the area. With current domestic visitors to North Wales primarily travelling
from the Midlands and the North-west of England, it would be logical to focus initial attention on this
area, promoting and securing North Wales as an accessible, affordable, and enjoyable wildlife
destination. Once North Wales has established itself as a reputable wildlife destination in these
42
geographical areas, efforts can be made to expand its reach. Effective marketing and promotion
efforts could achieve substantial revenue needed for the growth and development of the sector, and
this in turn has the potential to further increase visitations and revenue, which can be reinvested into
conservation and research ensuring the persistence of local habitats and wildlife in the future.
However, development and growth of the industry can have increased impacts on the environment
and it’s wildlife. It would be essential to the integrity of wildlife tourism and the habitats and species
the industry relies upon, to establish management techniques across the sector which mitigate
these impacts. Stipulating minimum requirements and standards of environmental safety and
awareness may be fundamental to the sustainability of the industry. It therefore could be necessary
to have an independent ‘body’ which develops, audits and maintains policies and standards across
the sector. Public and private sectors within the wildlife tourism industry would significantly benefit if
they worked co-operatively and collaboratively, forming partnerships. The sharing of knowledge and
skills has the potential to produce outstanding and unique products and packages. Establishment of
a local wildlife tourism centre and a focal website would be advantageous. Their purpose would be
to direct people around the area to locations which fit in with interests and needs, and provide
information on local products and services, as well as packaged holidays. Designing a voluntary
‘wildlife friendly’ scheme for local business to take part in, especially in the hospitality sector, could
open up new economic opportunities for businesses which are not associated with the wildlife
tourism industry. Members of this scheme would provide and loan basic tools and facilities to wildlife
tourists; for example, a boot drying room, wildlife identification books, maps, and binoculars. In
addition, they would also provide information on local wildlife sites and attractions, this would be a
two way partnership where wildlife sites and attractions promote and refer customers which are
seeking their services back to them.
Previously NWWT has focused on grants and donations as an income source. There is scope to
generate their own revenue from some strategic changes in their operations, products and services,
as well as the development of new ones. Attraction and retainement of visitors should be their
primary focus. This may require the provision of new products and services; initially the
43
development of basic facilities at reserves, with the possibility of creating a visitors centre at a
reserve in the future. Basic facilities should include; parking, bicycle racks, picnic benches, and
toilets. Development of parking spaces at reserves could present an opportunity to collect additional
income directly from visitors, and represent the first steps towards an independent and self-efficient
trust. This could simply be achieved through the implementation of a ticket machine at car parks,
this would be easy to install and maintain, and would not require additional staff to be employed.
NWWT should also identify and promote (charismatic) species which are present on their sites all
year round and seasonally, this will attract a range of visitors, and can be used to build a marketing
campaign on. Increased visitation at reserves will positively influence income for NWWT and other
local business. Therefore, NWWT should look into directly promoting the opportunity to see wildlife
in the area alongside existing attractions. This will rely on the formation of partnerships and
communication avenues with similar organisations, such as RSPB Conwy, Welsh Mountain Zoo,
Pilis Palas, and Treborth Botanic Gardens. In addition, a partnership with Bangor University (BU)
which own Treborth could also present a wealth of opportunities for both parties. BU has two
schools which could benefit from such a partnership; School of Biological Sciences, and School of
Environment, Natural Resources and Geography. Student of these schools often wish to take part in
work experience and volunteering in conservation and ecology; a partnership could facilitate their
career development as well provide NWWT with the ‘extra hands’ needed for their existing
conservation work, and future developments and projects. NWWT should also look into providing
wildlife orientated courses similar to those run by other Wildlife Trusts, these would be attractive to
students, graduates, wildlife enthusiasts and existing wildlife professionals. a partnership with BU
could provide them with the tools and facilities needed to run the courses, and it would provide an
additional source of income for NWWT.
44
References
Ahlstrom, D and Bruton,G (2009). International Management: Strategy and Culture in the Emerging World. USA: Cengage Learning. p129-136.
Analoi, F and Karami, A (2003). Strategic Management, in Small and Medium Enterprises. London: Thomson Learning. p247-251.
Black, K (2011). Business Statistics: For Contemporary Decision Making. US: John Wiley & Sons. p231.
Blake, A., Curtin, S., Brackstone, J., Richards, S., Vaughan, R., Edwards, J., & Fletcher, J. (2010). The Economic Impact of Wildlife Tourism in Scotland.
Boyd, J., & Banzhaf, H. S. (2006). What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Resources for the Future, Discussion Paper No. RFF DP, 06-02.
Callingham, M (2004). Market Intelligence: How and why Organizations Use Market Research. London: Kogan Page Limited. p103-107.
Curtin, S. (2013). Lessons from Scotland: British wildlife tourism demand, product development and destination management. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 2(3), 196-211.
Eagles, P. F., & McCool, S. F. (2002). Tourism in national parks and protected areas: Planning and management. CABI
45
Environment Agency Wales (2007). Wildlife Economy Wales: An Economic Evaluation Scoping Study. The Valuing Our Environment Partnership, Wales.
Fredline, L and Faulkner, B. (2001). INTERNATIONAL MARKET ANALYSIS OF WILDLIFE TOURISM. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. 22 (1), p10-35.
Fyall, A and Garrod, B (2005). Tourism Marketing: a collaborative approach. London: Channel View Publications. p105-106.
Higginbottom, K (2004). Wildlife Tourism: Impacts, Management and Planning. Australia: Common Ground Publishing Pty Ltd. p2-5.
Hill, C and Jones,G, 2011 (2011). Essentials of Strategic Management. 3rd ed. USA: Cengage Learning. p57-68.
Holloway, J (2004). Marketing for Tourism. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. p50-120.
ICRT (2010). Economic potential of Nature Tourism in Eastern Yorkshire. Leeds: ICRT. p1-44.
Johnson, P and Thomas, B (1994). Choice and Demand in Tourism. 3rd ed. London: Mansell Publishing Limited. p38-54.
MacLellan, L. R. (1999). An examination of wildlife tourism as a sustainable form of tourism development in North West Scotland. International Journal of Tourism Research, 1(5), 375-387.
Met Office. (2014). Past Weather Events. Available: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/climate/uk/interesting#y2012. [Last accessed 17/03/2014.]
Muscarado, G and Saltzer, M (2005). Understanding Tourism Wildlife Interactions: Visitor Market Analysis . Australia: Sustainable Tourism CRC. p2.
Newsome, D., Dowling, R., & Moore, S. (2005). Wildlife Tourism. Aspects of tourism series. Clevedon. Channel View Publications.
Office for National Statistics. (2014). The Regional Value of Tourism 2011. Available: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171776_353069.pdf. [Last accessed 17/03/2014.]
Ryan, C. (1998). THE TRAVEL CAREER LADDER An Appraisal. Annuals of Tourism Research. 25 (4), 936-957.
Schermerhorn, J (2009). Exploring Management. 2nd ed. London: John Wiley & Sons. p147-148.
The Wildlife Trusts. (2014). Working Together. Available: http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/who-we-are/royal-society-wildlife-trusts. Last accessed 7th Oct 2014.
UK National Ecosystem Assessment: Technical Report, June 2011, Chapter 20, [accessed 18th march 2014]
UNWTO (2006) Tourism Highlights, 2006 edition. Madrid: UNWTO
46
Welsh Government. (2013). Visits to Tourist Attractions in Wales 2012. Available: http://wales.gov.uk/docs/drah/publications/Tourism/130603attractions2012en.pdf. [Last accessed 17/03/2013.]
White, P. C. L., & Lovett, J. C. (1999). Public preferences and willingness-to-pay for nature conservation in the North York Moors National Park, UK. Journal of Environmental Management, 55(1), 1-13.
Wilson, C and Tisdell, C. (2001). Conservation and Economic Benefits of Wildlife-based Marine Tourism: Sea Turtles and Whales as Case Studies. ECONOMICS, ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT. 64 .p1-19.
Wilson, R and Gilligan,C (2012). Strategic Marketing Management. London: Taylor and Francis. p387-423.
Woodside, A. (2008). Travel Motivation: a Critical Review of the Concept's Development. In: Woodside, A. and Drew, M. Tourism Management: Analysis, Behaviour and Strategy. London: CABI. p14-17.
Appendix I
This is survey is for research purposes only; in conjunction with North Wales Wildlife Trust and Bangor University. All information given is anonymous and confidential, and will not be passed on to third parties.
Have you heard of the Wildlife Trusts? Yes No
Are you a member of North Wales Wildlife Trust? Yes No
Are you a member of another Wildlife Trust? ______________________________
Have you been a visitor to this site/event previously? Yes No
Visitor Information:
Party information:
47
Postcode: _ _ _ _ _ _ _
How many people are there in your party? Please Circle:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Travel Information:
48
Please indicate the ages of People in your party: filling in the brackets if multiple people are the same age. Eg. 3 Adults aged 25, 27, 32 would be noted as 25-34 [3]
Children: <3 [ _ ] 4-8 [ _ ] 9-13 [ _ ] 14-17 [ _ ]
Adults:18-24 [ _ ] 25-34 [ _ ] 35-44 [ _ ] 45-54 [ _ ] 55-64 [ _ ] 65-74 [ _ ] 75+ [ _ ]
Please indicate how you got to this site/event:
Walk Cycle Bus
Train Car Motorcycle
Do you live locally?
Yes No
Are you staying in accommodation overnight that is not your own?
Yes No
Please Indicate:
Campsite B&B Hotel Hostel
With Family/Friends
Agreement StatementsPlease indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statements in regards to your visit to the North Wales area:
Countryside Escapism (incl. Coastal)Did you visit this area to escape from a busy lifestyle?-do you own a second home in this area?
Agree Disagree
Traditional Coastal TripDid you visit this area to specially enjoy the coastal landscape?
Wildlife Watching Did you visit this area with the intention of seeing (or seeking out) wildlife?
Activities OrientatedDid you visit this area to specifically take part in a physical/leisure activity?
(Walking, cycling, canoeing, kayaking, sailing, climbing, boating, fishing, shooting, etc)
Cultural and SightseeingDid you visit this area for its culture and/or sights?
(Festivals, castles, manor houses, museums, etc)
Nostalgic Trip Did you visit this area because it held significant importance to a pervious life stage/ memory?
How would you describe your interest in wildlife?
No Interest Passing interest Casual interest Serious/dedicated Interest
49
How much on average have you spent today? + Predicted Spend for the rest of the day
On Travel: _ _ _._ _ + _ _ _._ _
On Food and Drink: _ _ _._ _ + _ _ _._ _
On Accommodation: _ _ _._ _ + _ _ _._ _
On Leisure Activities: _ _ _._ _ + _ _ _._ _
Other Please Specify: _ _ _._ _ + _ _ _._ _
Which of these Local Wildlife Sites and Attractions have you visited?
Pilis Palas
Anglesey Sea Zoo
Welsh Mountain Zoo
Puffin Island
RSPB Conwy
A NWWT Reserve ____________________
Snowdonia National Park (Area Of) _____________________
Analoui, F and Karami, A (2003). Strategic Management in Small and Medium Enterprises. London: Thomson Learning. p247-251.
Fyall, A and Garrod, B (2005). Tourism Marketing: a collaborative approach. London: Channel View Publications. p105-106.
The Wildlife Trusts. (2014). Working Together. Available: http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/who-we-are/royal-society-wildlife-trusts. Last accessed 7th Oct 2014.
Wilson, C and Tisdell, C. (2001). Conservation and Economic Benefits of Wildlife-based Marine Tourism: Sea Turtles and Whales as Case Studies. ECONOMICS, ECOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT. 64 .p1-19.
Wilson, R and Gilligan,C (2012). Strategic Marketing Management. London: Taylor and Francis. p387-423.
50