Developing a spatial explicit model of nearby outdoor recreation use

Transcription

1 International Conference Forest Recreation Serving Urbanised Societies Developing a spatial explicit model of nearby outdoor recreation use Matthias Buchecker, Barbara Degenhardt and Felix Kienast Swiss Federal Research Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research (WSL) Group Social Sciences in Landscape Research 8903 Birmensdorf

2 Definition: Nearby outdoor recreation area 10 km Quickly accessible recreation area around the residential area

3 Starting point Increasing demand for outdoor recreation areas (Increase of leisure time, increase of brain work and stress) Steady use-pressure on peri-urban recreation areas (Extension of built-up areas, new traffic infrastructure and private sports facilities) Important to offer optimal recreation conditions in the limited area (need satisfaction, crowding, user conflicts) The understanding of nearby outdoor recreation behaviour and its determinants still fragmentary

4 Existing Swiss recreation model (Landesforstinventar) 2 km Significance of a forest area for recreation use = Number of inhabitants within 2km radius (accessibility) x density of path infrastructure

5 Project: Identifying nearby outdoor recreation use in peri-urban regions Dissertation project of Barbara Degenhardt Financed by COST-Action E33 Forest Recreation and Nature Tourism Questions: Which factors determine the use of nearby outdoor recreation areas? Which role plays thereby people s work-load? How can the use intensity of nearby outdoor recreation areas be predicted?

6 Research methods Investigation area: City of Frauenfeld ( inhabitants) - undisturbed source area - diverse recreation (target) area Methods: Qualitative Interviews with 18 recreation users (age, gender, activity) Standardised survey of the population of Frauenfeld (N= 656, R= 29 %) GIS-Model on the use intensity of the outdoor recreation area

7 Results: Qualitative Interviews / Motivation categories Goal: Understand nearby-outdoor recreation behaviour and identify the relevant factors / their categories Motivation categories in terms of nearby-outdoor recreation: 1. Psychological & physical regeneration 2. Nature experience 3. Self-enhancement 4. Harmony and pleasure 5. Health 6. Societal ideals 7. Activity performance 8. Social relations 9. Generativity 10. Attachment to a place

8 Heuristic model of nearby outdoor recreation behaviour Work-loads Work-strains Motives / Goals Activity loads Social loads Environmental loads Private loads Aktivity loads Cognitive strains Emotional strains Physical strains Activity goals Social goals Environmental goals Resources Recreation behaviour Activity behaviour Social behaviour Environmental behaviour Social loads Environmental loads Personal resources Social resources Environmental resources Copyright by Barbara Degenhardt

9 Questionnaire: Potential factors of nearby outdoor recreation on workdays Use Frequency Use of types of access roads Use of areas with specific characteristics Preference of recreation area characteristics Perceived security Reported health state Recreation motives Reported work loads Reported work strains Qualities of residential area Knowledge of place Available resources (time, vehicles,..) Individual socio-demographic characteristics

10 Map: Frequently visited zones in the nearby outdoor recreation area of Frauenfeld?

11 Results: Motivations for nearby outdoor recreation Relevant motives (often or always) Find fresh air Find quietness Be away from responsibilities Be in nature Health Compensate work loads Reflect Become more contented Use nature paths Feel free Find inner peace Watch changing nature Physical activity Stimulate senses Be away from commerce Be alone Experience open space

12 Results: Work load explaining outdoor recreation behaviour Reported Work Loads Concentration Work Emotion Work Sitting for long time Recreation Goals: R 2 B p B p B p General:Compensate from work 13% Cognitive: Better concentrate 7% Emotional: Find inner quiet 3% Physical: Demanding activity 2% Social: Do sth. in company 3% Social: Away from other people 1% Recreation Behaviour: Activity level 2% Companionship 1% Use frequency of small trails 0%

13 Results: Factors explaining people s use frequency Factors β p β p Concentration demand Opportunities to play Emotional work Opportunities for contact Sitting for a long time Gender Reduced concentration Reported health state Emotional exhaustion Dog Experience of fatigue Children under 8 years Narrow flat Allergies Green residential area Knowledge of the region Noisy residential area Self-efficacity Good air in r.a Age Meeting places in r.a Amount of leisure time Own garden R 2 = 17.3 %

14 Results: Preferred characteristics of the nearby outdoor recreation area Preferred qualities (very much) Deciduous f Coniferous f Mixed forest Field River Garden Open space Meadow Edge of forest Steep areas Lake Hilly areas Flat areas Other people View Sunny places Diverse landscape Without buildings Historical elements

15 Results: Frequently visited zones in the nearby outdoor recreation area of Frauenfeld

16 Model: Characteristics of zones predicting spatial use frequencies Predictors All N= 516 Pedestrian N= 333 Bike N= 99 Car N= 84 Length of rivers ns Length of lake shores Length of paths ns Length of roads ns Sunny edges of forest ns ns ns Area of topogr. domes Length of hedges ns Number of land uses ns ns Area of settlements Area of meadows and fields ns Accessibility ns View ns ns ns ns

17 Model: Self-reported and predicted use frequency of all groups Measured Predicted Number of visitors D2= 66% Look-out

18 Conclusions 1. Nearby outdoor recreation has a strong regulative function (recreation goals, interrelation between work load and recreation behaviour). 2. The physical characteristics of the area: better predictors of recreation behaviour than the potential push factors of the demand side. Pull factors >> push factors? High complexity of humans behaviour! 3. Accessibility = dominant factor for explaining spatial use frequencies, at least for pedestrians. But there are other relevant physical characteristics and also push factors that have to be considered to achieve sufficiently precise predictions of use intensities.

19 Implications for forest planning Forest recreation is existential for urban societies and the work capacities of their residents: Public investment in recreation-demand oriented forest planning pays! Demanded are a high natural variety of the area (mixed forests, access to rivers and lakes), a high density and variety of path infrastructure and a good mix between forest and islands of openland. As crucial is fostering quick and attractive accesses to the nearby outdoor recreation areas. They should be safe and rich in natural elements: Collaboration with settlement planning Using models that predict use-intensities help to monitor recreation use and anticipate effects (e.g. crowding) of planned interventions.

20 Thank you for your attention! Questions?