Linking visitors’ spatial preferences to sustainable visitor management in a Norwegian national park

The increasing numbers of tourists visiting national parks contribute to new oppor­ tunities as well as challenges. Alpine and Arctic national parks in Northern Europe are key habitats for vulnerable species such as wild reindeer (Rangifer tarandus tarandus), and there is a significant need for management tools that can reduce the negative impacts of tourism. To gain knowledge about visitors' motivations and spatial preferences, we carried out a survey of people (n = 498) on paths in part of Rondane National Park, Norway. The results indicate that a large share of the visitors in the central, vulnerable part of the National Park may find their desired recreation­ al benefits in the less vulnerable fringe entrance areas. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of the results and how to increase knowledge about visitors' spatial preferences in order better to regulate their behaviour with the aim of reduc­ ing impacts on vulnerable fauna. Profile

[1]  P. Fredman,et al.  Travel motives of German tourists in the Scandinavian mountains: the case of Fulufjället National Park , 2017 .

[2]  Courtney L. Larson,et al.  Effects of Recreation on Animals Revealed as Widespread through a Global Systematic Review , 2016, PloS one.

[3]  O. Vistad,et al.  Linking visitor motivation with attitude towards management restrictions on use in a national park , 2015 .

[4]  K. Kangas,et al.  Examining the relationship between recreation settings and experiences in Oulanka National Park – A spatial approach , 2015 .

[5]  Peter J. Fix,et al.  Visitor experiences across recreation settings: A management or measurement issue? , 2013 .

[6]  Bram Van Moorter,et al.  A road in the middle of one of the last wild reindeer migration routes in Norway: crossing behaviour and threats to conservation , 2013 .

[7]  B. van Moorter,et al.  Learning from the past to predict the future: using archaeological findings and GPS data to quantify reindeer sensitivity to anthropogenic disturbance in Norway , 2013, Landscape Ecology.

[8]  Jørund Aasetre,et al.  Outdoor recreation research: Different approaches, different values? , 2012 .

[9]  R. Manning,et al.  Managing Outdoor Recreation: Case Studies in the National Parks , 2012 .

[10]  Erik A. Backlund,et al.  Effects of Setting-Based Management on Visitor Experience Outcomes: Differences Across a Management Continuum , 2012 .

[11]  Marit Vorkinn,et al.  The Wilderness Purism Construct — Experiences from Norway with a simplified version of the purism scale , 2012 .

[12]  D. Cole,et al.  Do Recreation Motivations and Wilderness Involvement Relate to Support for Wilderness Management? A Segmentation Analysis , 2010 .

[13]  P. Newman,et al.  Understanding Recreational Experience Preferences: Application at Fulufjället National Park, Sweden , 2010 .

[14]  K. Veisten,et al.  Turning National Parks into Tourist Attractions: Nature Orientation and Quest for Facilities , 2010 .

[15]  J. Vaske.  Survey Research and Analysis: Applications in Parks, Recreation and Human Dimensions , 2008 .

[16]  R. B. Hammer.  Recreation and Rural Development in Norway: Nature Versus Culture , 2008 .

[17]  T. Heberlein,et al.  Visits to the Swedish Mountains: Constraints and Motivations , 2005 .

[18]  B. L. Driver,et al.  Measuring Leisure Motivation: A Meta-Analysis of the Recreation Experience Preference Scales , 1996 .

[19]  O. Vistad,et al.  Visitor monitoring in nature areas : A manual based on experiences from the Nordic and Baltic countries , 2007 .

[20]  D. Cole.  Wilderness Experiences What Should We Be Managing For , 2004 .