Living Rev. Landscape Res.

, 1, (2007), 2 LIVING LLRR REVIEWS

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2 in landscape research

Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism:

A European Perspective

Simon Bell
OPENspace Research Centre, Edinburgh College of Art,
Lauriston Place, Edinburgh EH3 9DF, U.K.
email: [email protected]
http://www.openspace.eca.ac.uk/

Liisa Tyrväinen
Finnish Forest Research Institute, Rovaniemi, Finland
email: [email protected]
http://www.metla.fi/pp/3166/

Tuija Sievänen
Finnish Forest Research Institute, Helsinki, Finland
email: [email protected]
http://www.metla.fi/pp/TSie/

Ulrike Pröbstl
Institute for Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning,
University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences (BOKU)
Vienna, Austria
email: [email protected]
http://www.rali.boku.ac.at/6649.html

Murray Simpson
School of Geography and Environment,
University of Oxford, U.K.
email: [email protected]

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

ISSN 1863-7329

Accepted on 18 April 2007

Published on 25 June 2007

Abstract
Recreation and nature tourism are increasingly important activities with many implica-
tions both economic and environmental. As society changes so the demands and trends for
recreation and nature tourism change and develop. This poses many challenges for planners
and managers of recreational areas and providers of services. This review article focuses on
the situation in Europe but does not ignore some major trends and issues arising elsewhere,
while much of the research can be traced back to ideas and methods developed elsewhere,
such as the U.S.A. To set the scene the main social and environmental trends are presented
that show how the changing nature of society feeds through in expectations and demands for
recreation and nature tourism. Demographic changes, consumer behaviour and the increas-
ingly mobile and connected lifestyles of European citizens have produced trends for outdoor

This review is licensed under a Creative Commons

Attribution-Non-Commercial-NoDerivs 2.0 Germany License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/de/
2 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

recreation preferences and for broadening travel horizons. Knowing about these trends enables
planners and entrepreneurs to change their recreation or tourism offer to meet these demands.
However, these demands have to be seen in the context of changing pressures and sensitivities
of the environments, frequently natural, in which recreation and nature tourism activities are
located. Climate change is a prime example of these pressures. Many countries have devel-
oped sophisticated survey and other monitoring tools and instruments to identify demand, to
monitor levels and types of activity, changing preferences and pressures on the environment.
While recreation is often led by demand from people who wish to participate in certain activ-
ities there are also increasingly well recognised benefits to health and well-being from closer
contact with nature. Policy makers in the health sphere are taking a keen interest in this and
in the means for encouraging sedentary populations to engage with physical activity in natural
environments. The evidence base for this is improving and is reviewed in this paper. Manage-
ment of environments and visitors produces many conflicts which must be resolved. Recent
surveys of forest recreation have enabled a European-wide pattern to be identified which will
help planners and managers identify issues to be considered. The paper draws on work being
undertaken as part of two EU funded Cost Actions: “Cost E33: Forest Recreation and Nature
Tourism” and “Cost E39: Forests, Trees and Human Health and Well-being”. These allow
experts from around Europe to network and to pool research and practice.

Keywords: Recreation trends, visitor monitoring, health and well-being, sustainable tourism,
ecotourism, recreation conflicts, forest recreation

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
 Imprint / Terms of Use
Living Reviews in Landscape Research is a peer reviewed open access journal published by the
Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF), Eberswalder Straße 84, 15374
Müncheberg, Germany. ISSN 1863-7329.

This review is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-NoDerivs 2.0

Germany License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/de/

Because a Living Reviews article can evolve over time, we recommend to cite the article as follows:

Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson,
“Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective”,
Living Rev. Landscape Res., 1, (2007), 2. [Online Article]: cited [<date>],
http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2

The date given as <date> then uniquely identifies the version of the article you are referring to.

Article Revisions
Living Reviews supports two different ways to keep its articles up-to-date:

Fast-track revision A fast-track revision provides the author with the opportunity to add short
notices of current research results, trends and developments, or important publications to
the article. A fast-track revision is refereed by the responsible subject editor. If an article
has undergone a fast-track revision, a summary of changes will be listed here.

Major update A major update will include substantial changes and additions and is subject to
full external refereeing. It is published with a new publication number.

For detailed documentation of an article’s evolution, please refer always to the history document
of the article’s online version at http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2.
Contents
1 Introduction 5
1.1 Scope of the paper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.2 Structure of the paper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2 Drivers and trends in the demand for outdoor recreation and nature tourism in
Europe and the likely implications for policy and planning 8
2.1 Social and demographic drivers and trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 Environmental drivers and trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.3 Monitoring changes in recreation behaviour and assessing changes in demand . . . 13
2.4 On-site inventories: monitoring visitor flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.5 Trends in recreation participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.6 Trends in the development of nature tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.7 Potential benefits of nature tourism to communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3 The increasing evidence base for health benefits of outdoor recreation and access
to nature 21

4 Conflicts arising from outdoor recreation and nature tourism and sustainable
management of resources and environments 25
4.1 Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.2 North America . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.3 Principles of sustainable nature tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.4 Management of nature tourism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

5 Conclusions and research needs for the future 35

5.1 The drivers of recreation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.2 Health and well-being . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
5.3 Conflicts between recreation and nature tourism on sustainable use of resources and
environments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

References 38

List of Tables
1 Participation rates in some recreation activities in six European countries, Canada
and the United States in the 1990s and 2000s. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2 Number of visits in Finland’s national parks over the years 1996–2005. . . . . . . . 15
3 Measured changes in 1982–2002 and forecasting rate of change in outdoor recreation
participation 2010–2050 in the United States. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4 Expected changes in popularity of outdoor activities in future. . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 5

1 Introduction
The places associated with outdoor recreation have always included forests, the coast, lakes and
rivers, mountains and other spectacular scenery that is nowadays frequently designated as national
park or similarly protected. Recreation activities range from the very passive, such as sitting
relaxing or enjoying a view to the very active, such as skiing, mountain biking or horse riding.
They include the solitary, such as a person going for a walk by themselves or the gregarious, such
as a large family picnic or a group of friends going on a hike. Outdoor recreation has a history going
back many centuries, from when it was mainly the preserve of social elites who engaged in hunting,
for example, through the development of the urban middle classes who visited the seaside and
mountainous areas using the developing railway network to the modern car-borne mass recreation
to many different destinations of today (Bell, 1997).

Figure 1: A typical scene in Finland, where people are cooking outdoors in the forest.

In the U.S.A., the national park movement of the 19th century saw many areas of dramatic
mountain and other scenery protected as National Parks or National Monuments and these became
heavily visited during the early part of the 20th century. Early infrastructure was developed by
the Civilian Conservation Corps of the New Deal under the 1930s depression era legislation in the
U.S.A. Post Second World War demand for recreation reached new peaks prompting the creation
of a programme known as “Mission 66” which saw the development of the kind of recreation
infrastructure now common around the world – car parking, trails, visitor centres, interpretative
facilities and so on (Carr, 2006). In many countries outdoor recreation is focused on these places
as well as more local parks or areas that are accessible on a more everyday basis. The development
of recreation in other developed countries partly followed this route but with national and cultural
differences. In Scandinavia, the tradition of access made possible by “everyman’s right” has led to
much more of the countryside being available for access than in the U.S.A., which has strong private
property rights (Aasetre and Vistad, 2006). In the U.K., new legislation has opened more private
land to access for recreation (Dales, 2004). These represent typical differences in accessibility to
land for recreational purposes.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
6 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Figure 2: A path in Scotland where access to the land is much more open now than it used to be thanks
to new legislation.

Terminology related to outdoor recreation and tourism is somewhat unclear. In this paper the
distinction between outdoor recreation and nature tourism is as follows:
Outdoor recreation refers to activities that people undertake out of doors in places where
they can access nature or green areas, mainly as part of their daily or weekend routines. Nature
tourism is a term that covers activities that people enjoy while on holiday and which focus
on engagement with nature and usually includes an overnight stay (Silvennoinen and Tyrväinen,
2001). Typically this means travelling to and staying overnight in locations close to or in national
parks, forests, lakes, the sea or the countryside and participating in activities using these settings
and compatible with their natural qualities. Another related term that is found in the literature
or in common use is Ecotourism which, while connected with nature tourism (TIES, 1991),
focuses rather more on travel to rural and peripheral areas of developed countries and, increasingly,
to developing countries where experiencing local cultures and undertaking wilderness adventures
goes hand-in-hand with benefits to the tourist such as personal growth, benefits to the area visited
through volunteering, and through education by learning new ways to live on the planet. It
involves travel to places where the flora, fauna, and cultural heritage are the main attractions.
Responsible ecotourism aims to minimize the negative effects of traditional tourism on the natural
environment. This was emphasized by the UN in 2002 with the “International Year of Ecotourism”
(UNEP). Practically speaking, there are rather blurred divisions between the terms used in nature
or ecotourism. This large and developing subject less easy to circumscribe than outdoor recreation.
Moreover, European citizens travel outside Europe and the trends and drivers that affect their
motivation apply to the whole range of recreation and tourism, of which the subjects of this paper
are subsets.
As the population of the world becomes more urbanised and as concern, in particular in Europe,
about health impacts of modern living, such as lack of exercise, obesity (and associated problems
such as diabetes) and mental health problems (such as stress) increase, access to nature and the
potential benefits of outdoor recreation has started to climb higher on the policy agenda. This does
not only concern the traditional policy areas such as forestry, countryside or park management
but, increasingly, the health policy areas. A European Union scientific and technical co-operation

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 7

project “Cost Action E39: Trees, Forests and Human Health and Well-being”, (2004 to 2008) has
produced a series of country reports that describe the current state of policy and practice and
the increasing evidence base for the role of green areas in health and well-being. (Jepson, 2005;
Korpela and Sarjala, 2005; Sandur et al., 2005).

1.1 Scope of the paper

This review paper examines a number of trends related to recreation and nature tourism, mainly
in Europe but also some important world-wide aspects, introduced above and considers some of
the conflicts and the research needs raised by these trends. The subject of outdoor recreation and
nature tourism is receiving a lot of attention at present in Europe and elsewhere. Another Cost
Action “E33: Forest Recreation and Nature Tourism” (2004 to 2008) (Cost Action E33, 2004b)
brings together 80 researchers and practitioners from 24 countries, all involved in various aspects
of the field. Among the activities are a Europe-wide survey of different aspects of recreation
policy, planning, management and design and a series of topic papers aimed at producing common
frameworks for various aspects including visitor monitoring.
Outside Europe the most extensive research effort in outdoor recreation is probably being
undertaken by the U.S.A., where concern over health and obesity caused by poor diet and lack
of exercise is greater than anywhere else (Cordell, 2005). The traditional providers of recreation
have been the Forest Service within the Department of Agriculture and the National Park Service
supplemented by individual state park and forestry departments. These government organisations
together with universities have undertaken the bulk of research while a lot of work on the ground
also comes from or is funded by charitable or not-for-profit organisations.

1.2 Structure of the paper

This review paper provides an wide-ranging overview of the situation, mainly in Europe but also
reflects current issues elsewhere, looking at a number of key themes of outdoor recreation and
nature tourism that have emerged from the research community and described above.

• Drivers and trends in the demand for outdoor recreation and nature tourism and the likely
implications for policy and planning; these arise from society and socio-economic develop-
ments and set the scene for the rest of the paper.

• The evidence base for health benefits of outdoor recreation and access to nature; this is a
major and increasing concern for policy makers

• Conflicts arising from outdoor recreation and nature tourism and associated sustainable
management of resources and environments to overcome these conflicts;

• The research needed in the near future related to each of the above themes to help policy
makers, planners and managers to cope with the changing demands.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
8 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

2 Drivers and trends in the demand for outdoor recreation

and nature tourism in Europe and the likely implications
for policy and planning
Recently a number of attempts have been made to try to anticipate the trends in outdoor recreation
demand likely to result from changes already underway in society. One example has been carried
out in England by the Henley Centre/Headlight Vision who produced a report for the Countryside
Agency which attempted to evaluate trends likely to affect outdoor recreation over the next 15 to
20 years. This report identified a large number of drivers that may affect recreation. The initial
list can be grouped into a number of major themes that are likely to affect different countries and
regions in different ways and to different degrees (Henley Centre, 2005). These are presented below.
Some are also supported by other evidence while others emerged from stakeholder workshops and
are yet to be realised. Some of these are mainly social and demographic issues while others are
environmental.

2.1 Social and demographic drivers and trends

Demographic changes. These changes include the ageing society, where people are living longer,
a trend for people to have children later, lower birth rates leading to families with fewer children,
a wider range of household types, increases in ethnic diversity as a result of migration, a flow
of young people to cities from the countryside, rural depopulation, reducing populations in some
countries and increasing populations in others. These changes result in different patterns in the
use of leisure and recreation time, for example older retired people may have many years of time
for participating in recreation although as they grow older their physical abilities reduce. Another
example is the decrease in traditional households, so that family outings to recreation sites are less
the norm. As people have children at later ages they are able to spend more time travelling (a big
impact on nature tourism demand, see below) or take more holidays.
It is difficult to underestimate the impact of this driver over time. Many statistics demonstrate
the major effect of demographic changes (Eurostat, 2006), such as population reduction in rural
areas in many parts of Europe. In the U.S.A., however, population growth through immigration
is a significant factor (Cordell, 2005).
The affluent society. As developed countries become more prosperous and people have higher
average incomes they are able to spend more of their income on leisure and recreation activities.
This is also linked to the convenience culture, to the rise of the empowered consumer who wants
more choice and to changing work patterns enabling people to use leisure time more flexibly. As
economies mature and people already possess most of the tangible consumer products that they
want they start to desire intangible products such as experiences, often gained through leisure and
recreation, and especially through travel to far off places and in the pursuit of extreme adrenaline
sports and experiences.
The evidence of this can be seen in some of the statistics related to nature tourism in developing
countries. In 2005, there were more than 800 million international tourist arrivals globally, an
increase of 5.5% on 2004 (World Tourism Organization, 2006). It is estimated that the market for
nature tourism is increasing at six times the rate of tourism overall (World Tourism Organization,
2006). Some of the factors that have contributed to this growth trend in nature tourism are that
people are looking for new experiences, adding diversity to their experiences, combining business
travel with holidays and looking to “get back to nature” (Maetzold, 2002).
In Europe, pressure on leisure time is leading people to go on more, but shorter, trips (ETC,
2006). In addition, increased incomes and the growth of single-person households among the youth
market (16–35 age group) which accounts for over 20% of global tourism, are expected to result in

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 9

Figure 3: A trail in a park in Helsinki which has been specially laid out with older people in mind.

more active holidays, particularly adventure nature tourism (ETC, 2006).

The information society. This, with the all-pervasive influence of the internet, and of the
increasingly common use of mobile phones means that people are able to obtain information and
to communicate with each other very quickly and at any time of day or night (Selwyn, 2005). As
a result people make plans about their leisure and recreation time very quickly, at the last minute
and they also change them easily. They also make decisions on the basis of information available
from recreation and tourism providers on the internet, buy travel tickets, hotels and equipment
over the internet and write feedback about their experience on it.
Health and well-being. Society is increasingly concerned about the physical and mental
health of its citizens, with many conditions such as obesity and stress seen as reaching epidemic
proportions. Part of the concept of well-being is also associated with social inclusion, where people
from disadvantaged communities are able to take part fully in society. Disability, age, poverty and
poor living environments are often associated with each other and with poor health and well-being.
This has led to a desire to make the outdoors, especially more natural areas accessible and used
by as many people as possible. There is also what can be termed a re-tuning to nature, where
people feel a desire to become reconnected to the natural world from which they feel disconnected
by modern lifestyles. The increasing evidence for this is reviewed in a later section of this paper.
There has been recent work at trying to develop indices of life satisfaction that take into account
the role of human, social, built and natural capital at a country level (Vemuri and Costanza, 2006).
This suggests that social inclusion, as part of social capital, and natural areas as part of natural
capital, are both part of the equation of life satisfaction.
Environmental and community awareness. According to the Henley Centre/Headlight
Vision report people have a generally greater awareness of the environment and its problems, such
as global warming, pollution and deforestation. Membership of environmental organisations is in-
creasing and governments are taking environmental issues seriously at a national and international
level. Single issue politics concerning different environmental aspects are also on the rise. Many
people with such interests also want to engage in nature or ecotourism but they also wish to take

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
10 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

part in activities that may have a benefit for their local environment or for that of another country.
There is also a rise in communal yearning, where people want to feel part of a community and to
contribute to it during their leisure time by participating in community activities. This increas-
ing awareness of the environment and community can also help the managers of protected areas
implement measures that may restrict recreational access, because people understand the need for
this action.

2.2 Environmental drivers and trends

Landscape change. This factor is associated with the environment within which people live,
work and spend their leisure and recreation time. As a result of increasing urbanisation, rural
depopulation, pressures on the environment, climate change and changes in the economics of food
and timber production, brought about by policy changes and global trade, the landscape is changing
in different ways in different countries. In western Europe, for example, urban growth is generated
by economic development, transport infrastructure and by demographic changes. This may be
controlled to greater or lesser degrees by planning policies and instruments. There is also a trend
for the gentrification of the countryside as people move away from the towns and cities to rural
landscapes where the quality of life and community is seen to be better (Spencer, 1997).
In rural and peripheral regions landscapes are becoming abandoned as farming is uneconomic
and people migrate to the towns. This can have positive effects on the environment, as pollution
reduces and natural habitats increase, leading to attractive places for recreation. However, this
can also reduce the quality of the landscape, the infrastructure for recreation and tourism may be
at risk and the people who remain may not be well equipped with the entrepreneurial skills needed
to take advantage of the potential for recreation and nature tourism (MacDonald et al., 2000)

Figure 4: An abandoned field in Latvia, the result of economic and social changes in the countryside.

Climate change. With the increasing concern over climate change and the negative impact
that emissions from vehicles have on the environment, visitor transport issues should be viewed
as part of an integral network and alternatives created to the car or aeroplane. Climate change

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 11

is one of the biggest long-term threats facing not only the tourist industry but also the planet
and the impacts are beginning to be felt around the world. Potentially, climate change could lead
to the loss of many destinations whose appeal depends on the natural environment (ETC, 2006).
For example, climate change poses a serious threat to the future health of coral reefs through the
increased frequency and intensity of mass bleaching events (Grimsditch and Salm, 2006). The
research conducted by (Grimsditch and Salm, 2006) not only identified the main resistance and
resilience factors of coral reefs to bleaching but also management tools and strategies that can and
need to be implemented to enhance reef resilience. Areas where nature tourism is dependent on
high quality reef ecosystems will need to take this advice on board to minimize the impacts of
climate change.
If terrestrial species are unable to move or adapt to new climatic conditions, local extinctions
may occur. Vulnerable or already stressed ecosystems will be the first to be affected by climate
change. Scientists have been monitoring changes in phenology for many years. Phenology is
the simplest process in which to track changes in the ecology of species in response to climate
change (Walther et al., 2002). Menzel and Fabian (1999) reported that in Europe, over 30 years,
spring events, such as leaf unfolding, had advanced by 6 days and autumn events, such as leaf
colouring, were delayed by 4.8 days. Responses by individual species to climate change may
disrupt interactions with others (Walther et al., 2002). Crick et al. (1997) analysed data from
the British Trust for Ornithology’s nest record scheme collated between 1971 and 1996. Of the
65 species studied, 20 had significant trends towards earlier egg laying with an average of 8.8 days
(Crick et al., 1997). Bird watching (avitourism) was the fastest growing nature-based tourism in
the United States in 2002 (Maetzold, 2002). Any wildlife features that people want to enjoy will
be affected by changes in the timings of these events. The threat of climate change has also seen
an increase in the number of people visiting Alaska or Antarctica. With melting ice caps, people
are obviously determined to visit these areas before they disappear.
The intensity and frequency of weather events are also increasing. In recent years, the severity
of hurricanes hitting the Caribbean, Central and North America has increased These events will
result in loss of land and infrastructure, negatively impacting species living in the area but may also
deter tourists from visiting. Simpson et al. (2007) have conducted extensive research in Tobago on
the impact of climate change on tourism in the area. The three main observed effects were found
to be:
1. Changes in weather patterns; rainfall patterns causing seasonality blurring and; increase in
intensity of extreme events such as storm surges and hurricanes
2. Coastal erosion of beaches and cliffs
3. Coral bleaching (Simpson et al., 2007).
To reduce the impact of climate change on nature tourism it is necessary not only to adapt but
to mitigate causal effects. Simpson et al. (2007) discuss research, planning, management and action
that is required to reduce, and mitigate, the potential impact that climate change will have on
nature tourism in Tobago. Many of the suggestions require action before the planning or construc-
tion stage where this is still possible. A crucial interdependence exists between the climate, the
environment, tourism and communities (Simpson et al., 2007). Sustainable, responsible tourism
policies should be implemented and integrated into local, regional and national government strate-
gies. Government policy plays a very important role in the development of tourism industries that
are financially and ecologically sustainable (Eagles, 2001). Many natural zones cross administra-
tive and political boundaries and this must be taken into account when developing ecotourism.
Without having all nations that border an area involved, conflicts will be unavoidable.
Once the drivers and trends are understood, it is necessary for policy makers, planners and
managers to have some knowledge and understanding of the likely changes in behaviour and demand

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
12 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

that may affect specific areas. This is the field of visitor monitoring which, while established first
in the U.S.A. has become an important tool in Europe. The next section reviews some of the
systems used to assess and monitor changes in recreation behaviour and for assessing changes in
visitor demand.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 13

2.3 Monitoring changes in recreation behaviour and assessing changes

in demand
The need for national level information about recreation demand was already recognised forty
years ago in the United States. The first National Recreation Survey (NRS) was conducted in
1960 (Cordell, 2004). The continuity of a core set of participation and demographic questions used
in surveys since then has ensured that trend construction and comparisons of recreation at the
level of the U.S. population over the years have been possible. Similar efforts have been taking
place in other countries such as Canada, Denmark, Norway, Finland and Sweden but the contents
and extent of the nationwide recreation surveys varies considerably. Without such surveys it is
very difficult to calculate the level of resources needed to supply recreation, or to determine the
way that trends resulting from the factors described above manifest themselves in demand. The
surveys enable providers of outdoor recreation to change their strategies to meet the challenges of
these changing demands.
The latest National Survey of Recreation and Environment (NSRE) 2006, recently completed
in the United States, includes information collection about recreation participation and recreation
trips, covering 50 different outdoor activities (see NSRE, 2003). In Scandinavia, Denmark has
conducted a series of recreation surveys which offer the possibility to compare forest recreation
participation over time: Danish surveys cover the overall levels of visitation to forests, and include
a remarkable set of data about forest and landscape preferences (Jensen and Koch, 2004). The
survey in 1993/94 reached a response rate of over 80%, from samples of almost 3,000 persons
(Jensen and Koch, 2004).
In Finland, only one nation-wide recreation survey (LVVI, see Sievänen, 2001) has been con-
ducted but there are plans to repeat the study in 2008–2010. The Finnish survey data included
about 10,000 respondents. The main issues measured were participation in outdoor activities,
recreation trips close-to-home and trips which also included an overnight stay (Sievänen, 2001).
However, while there are many differences in concepts, terms and units of measurements, some
international comparisons are possible. In Table 1, participation rates of some of the most typical
recreation activities in six countries have been collected to express the diversity, similarity and
differences of recreation behaviour among different nations (Scrintzi et al., 1995; Jensen and Koch,
1997; Statistics Netherlands, 1997; Cordell et al., 1999; DuWors et al., 1999; Sievänen, 2001; Vaage,
2004). The idea of harmonizing approaches for recreation information monitoring, so that interna-
tional comparisons can be made and so that Europe-level analysis is possible, has been discussed
in the research community, particularly in the Cost Action E33. It will be seen if more comparable
data is available in future.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
14 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Table 1: Participation rates in some recreation activities in six European countries, Canada and the
United States in the 1990s and 2000s.

Recreation Participation rate in %

activity
Denmark Finland Holland Italy Norway Canada U.S.A.
a) b) c) d) e) f) g)
Walking 63 68 74 40 84 67
Hiking 19 38 82 24
Bicycling 55 68 6 47 29
Jogging, run- 14 16 16 4 26
ning
Camping 18 2 19 14
Picnicking 10 28 45 26 49
Hunting 1 8 4 9 5 7
Picking 2 57 35 11
berries and
other ‘forest
fruits’
Picking wild 3 41 21 13
mushrooms
Cross- 1 2 6 3 4 2 5
country
horseback
riding
Studying and 56 51 21 31
enjoying na-
ture
Cross- 40 2 50 4 3
country ski-
ing

a) A mail questionnaire regarding forest recreation on a sample of 2,826 of the Danish adult population in
1993–94, conducted by the Danish Forest & Landscape Research Institute. (Jensen and Koch, 1997)

b) A telephone survey, sample of 12,709 among the whole population conducted by Statistics Finland and
Finnish Forest Research Institute in 1998–2000 (Sievänen, 2001).

c) A diary survey by Statistics Netherlands (CBS) in 1995–96 (Statistics Netherlands, 1997).

d) A mail questionnaire on sample of 3,000 of the whole Italian population in 1995; recreation activities in
forest (Scrintzi et al., 1995).

e) (Vaage, 2004)

f) The Nature Survey, sample of 86,951 Canadians by Statistics Canada in 1997 (DuWors et al., 1999).

g) NSRE telephone survey of sample of 12,000 people in 1994/95 (Cordell et al., 1997).

Empty space refers that a comparable figure was not available.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 15

2.4 On-site inventories: monitoring visitor flows

On-site recreation inventories, i.e. visitation monitoring systems, are an important part of the whole
management policy of recreation and protected areas in many countries. The recreation monitoring
system most often applied is a science-based system for data collection, data management and
reporting, which supplies updated visitor information on a continuous basis for policy makers and
managers. Monitoring systems differ between countries, but often standardization of methods and
harmonization of information content has taken place within one country or at least within one
public land agency.
The most common visitation information measured includes number of visits, duration of visit
and distribution of visitors over the recreation area. Information gathered from visitors usually
consists of socio-economic factors such as sex, age, income and municipality/region/country of
residence, length and means of travel and amount of money spent. Visitor behaviour patterns
describe the level and type of participation in recreation activities, the length of stay in the area and
the make up of the group who made the visit. Visitor satisfaction, motives and the expectations of
visit and experiences are also studied in most cases. As a result of Nordic-Baltic project on visitor
monitoring a new manual (Kajala, 2006; Kajala et al., 2007) is going to be published in 2007.
The coming manual offer recommenadations to choose variable, measures and sample methods for
visitor monitoring.
The United States Forest Service has implemented a sophisticated on-site visitor monitoring
system called the National Visitor Use Monitoring System (NVUM). With this system, one fourth
of the 160 national forests in the country are sampled each year through a system of site-day
sampling. Activities, duration of visit, satisfaction, trip spending profiles and sites visited are
collected and GIS referenced to provide location-specific, regional, and national estimates to guide
policy, management, maintenance, budgeting and customer responsiveness (English et al., 2002).

Table 2: Number of visits in Finland’s national parks over the years 1996–2005. Source: Metsähallitus
(2006), Finland.

Year Number of visits

1996 714,000
1997 749,000
1998 771,000
1999 787,000
2000 833,000
2001 852,000
2002 1,012,000
2003 1,123,000
2004 1,285,000
2005 1,410,000

In Denmark, automatic monitoring of the car-based forest visitation at four selected forest
areas was established in the mid 70’s and has been going on ever since. In addition, on-site in-
ventories have been carried out in more than 300 forest areas in 1976–77 and again in 1996–97 in
more than 500 Danish forest and nature areas (Jensen and Koch, 1997). In the United Kingdom,
visitor counting and surveys are also widely applied and used in planning and management pro-
cesses. Finland has standardized visitor study procedures in order to obtain comparable visitor

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
16 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

information from all state owned recreation and protected areas (Erkkonen and Sievänen, 2002;
Rauhala et al., 2002). The national recreation management policy uses visitor surveys in order
to develop customer-driven management in recreation areas. In many other European countries,
even though a majority (85%) has conducted some studies about recreational visits to specific
recreational sites, systematic and standardized visitor information collection systems are still in a
developmental stage (Skov-Petersen and Jensen, 2005).
An example of trends based on systematic visitor counting in national parks comes from Fin-
land. The Metsähallitus (Forest and Park Service), which manages the majority of state owned
forest lands in Finland, has monitored recreational use in national parks and state owned hiking
areas for over ten years (Table 2). It shows how the basic trend is for an increased level of vis-
itation. The pattern varies across each park and this enables the identification of places where
visitor levels start to place pressure on natural resources, for example, or those locations that are
particularly sensitive to recreation activities.

2.5 Trends in recreation participation

The science based information of existing trends in recreation behaviour is best documented in the
United States, where monitoring of participation in outdoor activities has continued since early
1960’s. According to Cordell et al. (1999); Cordell (2004, 2005) and the Interagency National
Survey Consortium (NSRE, 2003), participation in all outdoor activities has been increasing when
measured in terms of the total numbers of participating people (Table 3). This increase in total
participation rates is partly due to the increasing population. However, the numbers of visits and
visiting people matters when looking at the pressures of recreational use on natural resources,
which tend to be finite.

Table 3: Measured changes in 1982–2002 and forecasting rate of change in outdoor recreation participation
2010–2050 in the United States. Sources: a) Cordell et al. (1997), b) NSRE (2003), c) Cordell (2004).

Participants, Measured Index of forecast c)

millions
1982 a) 1994 b) 2002 c) 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Cross-country 5.3 6.5 8.1 1.15 1.23 1.49 1.67 1.91

skiing
Downhill skiing 10.6 16.8 18.1 1.09 1.16 1.36 1.54 1.82
Snowmobiling 5.3 7.1 11.7 1.00 1.05 1.08 1.13 1.22
Hunting 24.7 18.6 23.7 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.99
Hiking 24.7 47.8 69.7 1.04 1.11 1.19 1.24 1.31
Backpacking 8.8 15.2 22.2 0.93 0.99 0.91 0.91 0.94
Camping primi- 17.7 28.0 33.9 0.92 0.98 0.87 0.84 0.84
tive
Walking 93.6 133.7 175.4 1.07 1.15 1.22 1.27 1.33
Fishing 60.1 57.8 72.2 1.05 1.12 1.17 1.21 1.27
Sailing 10.6 9.6 11.1 1.06 1.13 1.24 1.33 1.48
Motor boating 33.6 47.0 51.8 1.06 1.13 1.21 1.29 1.40
Horseback riding 15.9 14.3 20.5 1.07 1.18 1.28 1.39 1.54

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 17

In the United States, most rapidly increasing numbers of participants are in walking, sight-
seeing, swimming, picnicking and boating. In general, traditional outdoor activities such hiking
and camping are still growing at a moderate rate, while consumptive activities such as hunting are
declining. New types of activities such as viewing fish and wildlife and motorized outdoor activities
such as snowmobiling or jet skiing are activities that are increasing most in popularity (Cordell,
2005). Table 4 shows these trends.

Table 4: Expected changes in popularity of outdoor activities in future (Cordell, 2004, 2005).

Fastest growing activities Slowest growing activities

Kayaking Motor-boating
Snowboarding Primitive camping
Jet skiing Sailing
View or photograph fish Visit historic sites
Snow-mobiling Downhill skiing
Ice Fishing Snorkeling/scuba
Sledding Visit beach/waterside
View wildlife Anadromous fishing
Backpacking Caving
Day hiking Small game hunting
Bicycling Migratory bird hunting
Horseback riding Picnicking
Canoeing Warm-water fishing
Saltwater fishing
Swimming

As in the United States, the traditional consumptive activities of hunting and picking wild
berries and mushrooms seem to be in decline in popularity in Scandinavia (Lindhagen and
Hörnsten, 1998; Sievänen, 2001; Sievänen et al., 2004). Instead, snowmobiling is increasing in
popularity. In most European countries there is no long term monitoring or statistics of outdoor
recreation, so that it is less easy to spot these trends, but it is very likely that many of the trends
that are now seen in the United States, likely to develop in Europe.
This section has shown that the assessment of behaviour and demand is essential for creating a
picture of emerging patterns and trends so that policies can be developed and planning take place
with the best information possible. However, it is obvious that these systems are mainly available
and implemented in developed countries with often mature economies and where legislation and
other instruments are available to manage supply and demand. They are less likely to be available
in developing countries.

2.6 Trends in the development of nature tourism

Nature tourism is a rapidly expanding activity throughout the world which encompasses many
different activities but essentially includes those which involve participants engaging with nature.
The industry segment takes place in predominantly natural settings with the added emphasis
of fostering understanding and conservation of the natural environment (Newsome et al., 2002).

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
18 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Nature tourism can take many forms, ranging from the passive (enjoying a view, painting) to
the active (white-water rafting, mountain biking) and from the consumptive (fishing, hunting) to
the non-consumptive (walking, bird-watching). Ecotourism, a term that has been increasing in
popularity in recent years, is one niche market within the larger nature tourism market (Halpenny
and Otte, 1999). The International Ecotourism Society defines ecotourism as “responsible travel to
natural areas that conserves the environment and improves the well-being of local people” (TIES,
1991). Nature tourism has the potential to provide many opportunities, as illustrated in Figure 5.
Stueve et al. (2002) estimated that natural areas, and their closely associated local cultures,
and the various related tourist, recreational and leisure activities, contribute around half the total
economic activity attributable to the travel and tourism sector. This equates to approximately
US$ 340 billion in 2005. Tourism is the principle ‘export’ (foreign exchange earner) for 83% of
developing countries (Mastny, 2001). Nature-based tourism diffuses economic benefits to rural or
peripheral regions because the main natural and heritage attractions are often away from urban
or industrial areas.

2.7 Potential benefits of nature tourism to communities

Many private, public and community landholders are turning to nature tourism as a profitable
adjunct or replacement for farming, forestry or fisheries. In the past, the main function of forests in
Europe was that of wood production. Today, in many European countries that are largely forested
nature tourism is increasingly seen as an important chance to diversify the means of livelihood in
rural areas (Tyrväinen et al., 2002). With the decline in the importance of this as a management
goal in many regions, nature tourism is often looked upon as a means for rural development (Cost
Action E33, 2004a), see Figure 5. Though there is also the danger of negative impacts; severe
pressures on many forest areas in danger of being degraded ecologically and physically due to high
recreational use (Cost Action E33, 2004a).

Global Revenue
Environmental understanding generation
education Industry
replacement and
Cultural diversification
exchange
NATURE Protected Area
Healthy living TOURISM justification and use
(well-being)
Employment
Visitor
appreciation Regeneration of
and awareness Livelihood local economies
Biodiversity benefits
maintenance and
improvement

Figure 5: Potential benefits resulting from Nature Tourism.

The possibilities and interest of developing nature tourism vary between European countries.
In Finland, almost 80% of the population live in urban environments and, in 2004, 40% of the
adult population took nature trips equating to an average of nine trips per person per year (Sil-
vennoinen and Tyrväinen, 2001). Currently, nature tourism businesses are often relatively small
scale and mostly part-time enterprises combined with agriculture and forests. In some area such

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 19

as in Lapland, Finland nature tourism is already the most important sector contributing the re-
gional economy (Tyrväinen, 2006). Furthermore, new forests are also being established with public
recreation very much in mind, often close to large centres of urban population (Cost Action E33,
2004a).
Tourism based on natural environments is an increasing international industry with major
economic, social and environmental consequences at both local and global scales (Buckley, 2003).
Many of the conflicts emerging as a result of nature tourism differ between developing and more
developed countries. People in developing countries who live in areas that are often most attractive
to nature or eco-tourists often rely on products, services, or land from natural areas, to meet
their livelihood needs (Salafsky and Wollenberg, 2000). In these situations, demand on resources
can conflict with conservation or tourism requirements. Incursions into protected areas, whether
for wildlife poaching or subsistence hunting, are commonplace. Moreover, tourism may create a
dependency on a volatile, seasonal industry and it may conflict with other livelihood activities
such as fishing or agriculture (Ashley et al., 2000). In largely forested countries in northern
Europe tourism industry competes with commercial forestry and timber production. Salafsky and
Wollenberg (2000) developed a conceptual framework for defining the linkage between livelihood
activities and conservation. They found that if there is a direct linkage, so that livelihoods are
dependent on biodiversity, or where the local community benefits economically, they are more
likely to taken action to counter threats to resources (Salafsky and Wollenberg, 2000).
There are a number of common strategies required to develop successful nature tourism op-
erations irrespective of region or country. The European Commission produced a comprehensive
report that detailed and developed fifteen principles for the management of rural tourism (Euro-
pean Commission, 2000) that can be adapted and applied to nature tourism. The document also
contains information on the components of good practice for rural tourism. Three of the areas for
which guidance was provided concerned working together to a strategy, delivering a quality (rural)
tourism experience and strengthening quality management and monitoring processes (European
Commission, 2000).

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
20 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Figure 6: A hiking path in Halkidiki in Greece provides opportunities for nature tourism.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 21

3 The increasing evidence base for health benefits of out-

door recreation and access to nature
As identified in the section on the drivers of future outdoor recreation, health and well-being
is an increasing area of research. The body of literature in Europe supporting positive links
between active and passive use of natural environments and human health is increasing but still
relatively fragmented (Morris, 2003). Evidence suggests that forests and other nature areas help
in people’s recovery from stress and attentional fatigue. Outdoor recreation is well on the way
to becoming an important element of a healthy living and a remedy against the deficiencies of a
modern life separated from nature. People with special needs such as the elderly or those with
physical or mental disability often gain therapeutic benefits from activities conducted in natural
environments. Mental well-being is supported also through the role that play takes in helping to
establish personal and community identity for children and young people.

Figure 7: Encouraging young children to be active outdoors is important for their physical and social
development.

By offering an attractive environment for recreational activities, forests may seduce people
with a sedentary life style to become more active during their leisure time. Activities such as
recreational walking and cycling already have a positive effect on health. It has been shown that
more green space within the living environment leads to people visiting natural environments more
often (e.g. Grahn and Stigsdotter, 2003; Tyrväinen et al., 2005). However, a higher number of
visits to green areas does not automatically mean that these people are more physically active. For
example, people living in a less green environment may still walk often, but do so more frequently
in a built-up area as opposed to a green space.
Urban forests and parks near to where people live are especially important for elderly and young
people who are restricted in their capacity to travel. The most active users of neighbourhood forests
are probably children. There are also programmes that try to stimulate people to become physically
active within the local natural environment, for example in the United Kingdom (Ashcroft, 2002;
O’Brien, 2005). When they do go for a walk, a lack of nearby nature-based opportunities tends

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
22 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

to increase the number of people using a car and subsequently leads to driving longer distances to
visit an attractive natural area (de Vries, 2000). The key factor for active use is easy access to the
areas, preferably within walking distance from home. In a survey study in Salo, Finland half of
the respondents noted that the main reason for not using urban recreation areas was the distance
to get there (Tyrväinen, 2001).
The most sought after experiences are mainly enjoying the natural scenery, peace and quiet.
These qualities are sought, if possible, near home, but increasingly they can be found only in
rural and peripheral urban areas. Finnish nature tourists, for example, look for quiet and peaceful
surroundings as well as the possibility to move independently in a natural environment. In addition,
hiking trails and constructed facilities for the outdoors were emphasized, while guided activities
and excursions were seen as less important. The Finns seem to retain a relatively close association
with nature and to retain the skills needed to manage independently in natural places. However,
the urbanization process also taking place in Finland may increase the demand of guided activities
in the future (Tyrväinen et al., 2003).
Tourists mainly evaluate the environment in terms of landscape, where attractive scenery be-
comes one of the most important reasons for the choice of destination (Tyrväinen et al., 2001). In
Finland, almost 80% of people live in cities or population centres, but almost half of Finns (48%)
are interested in taking a nature trip within a year and 26% within the next few year. Most people
(28%) were interested in taking a trip to a national park, hiking, fishing or hunting area owned
by the state. Private cottages were also a relatively popular travel destination (16%). Tourists
were willing to travel an average of 380 km from their home municipality to a nature area. Today,
the majority of national parks are located in Lapland, some 800–1000 kilometres from the capital,
Helsinki Metropolitan area. Therefore, the demand for shorter travel distance puts more pressure
for developing nature tourism services in commercial forests located in South-Finland, mainly in
private ownership (Tyrväinen et al., 2003).
If open to the public, recreational use of forests tends to be rather intensive in highly populated
countries such as the Netherlands. Forests, however, have a relatively large “social capacity” per
hectare, because of the screening effect of trees there can be many people present without the area
feeling crowded. The perception of crowdedness obviously also depends on visitor expectations.
However, people’s recreational motives vary and different user interests often lead to conflicts (see
below). For example, those who want to go for a walk in a quiet and natural environment may
feel disturbed by others, who pursue hobbies such as horseback riding and mountain biking (e.g.
Seeland et al. (2002). In the future, motorized use of natural areas is likely to be in increasing
conflict with activities linked with experiencing peace and quietness and solitude.
Psychological well-being does not necessarily have to be derived through physical activity. An
important positive health effect of viewing and experiencing nature is its stress reducing effect.
Research aiming to replicate original studies in the United States (Ulrich et al., 1991) has led
to similar results in Sweden (see e.g. Hartig et al., 1996). Just visually experiencing a natural
setting can be shown to reduce stress. Stress relief, as measured through muscle tension, blood
pressure and electrical brain activity, can be demonstrated within some minutes of exposure to
a green environment (Ulrich et al., 1991). Moreover, viewing or visiting natural environments
(compared to built urban environments without natural elements) after stressful or mentally fa-
tiguing situations, produces greater physiological changes toward relaxation and faster recovery of
attention-demanding cognitive performances (Parsons et al., 1998).
There are only a few epidemiological studies on the relationship between nature and health. A
study in Sweden by Grahn and Stigsdotter (2003) demonstrated that the more often one visits green
areas the less often one reports sickness from stress. An epidemiological study performed in the
Netherlands by (Maas et al., 2006) showed that residents of neighbourhoods with abundant green
space tend, on average, to enjoy better general health. This positive link was found to be most
apparent among the elderly, housewives, and people from lower socioeconomic groups. Moreover,

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 23

Figure 8: An urban park in the Netherlands provides valuable green space in a crowded country.

a recent study in Finland (Tyrväinen et al., 2006) conducted in two largest cities showed that
perceived stress symptoms and self-reported health was influenced by the total amount of time
spent in natural areas. Similar results have been found in the U.K. (Bell et al., 2005). The results
suggest that exposure to nature areas increases positive emotions while negative emotions decrease
only when exposure to natural areas is relatively high. Weekly contact with nature within work
or study was found to increase positive emotions and decrease negative emotions.
It is unclear to what extent the mechanism behind this restorative effect is evolutionary in
character and/or cognitively mediated. Studies related to restorative environments show that peo-
ple use favourite places often located in natural environments to regulate their self-experience and
feelings. Moreover, these places are usually aesthetically appreciated and provide an opportunity
for self-expression. Restorative outcomes, i.e. relaxation, decrease in negative feelings, forgetting
worries, and recovering attention focus have characterised visits to natural favourite places (e.g.
Hartig et al., 1991; Korpela and Hartig, 1996).
A high aesthetic quality may not be required for a stress reducing effect, but might be helpful
to attract people to the recreation area. One precondition, however, is quite generally thought to
be important for restorative effects: safety. The (assumed) presence of potentially dangerous other
people will diminish positive health effects. As mentioned before, common motives for visiting
forests and natural environments are experiencing solitude, peace and quietness. These qualities
may also be conducive to the stress-reducing effect. However, crime statistics, for example in the
United Kingdom, show that physical attacks are rare in woods, and that such concerns are often
based on perceptions rather than reality (Burgess, 1995). One of the key factors for security is
visibility, which requires active management of the understorey, and giving the impression that the
area is controlled (Tyrväinen et al., 2003; Thompson et al., 2004).
Another possible mechanism relating nature to health is that of social interaction and cohe-
sion. While European research in this topic is still scarce, several studies conducted in Chicago
suggest that green space, especially trees, may help to facilitate (positive) social interaction with
neighbourhood members (see e.g. Kweon et al., 1998). This is suggested to reduce feelings of social

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
24 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Figure 9: High quality landscapes are frequently associated with good restorative values.

isolation, which is a risk factor related to depression. Although it is still unclear what are the
most relevant mechanisms behind the health effects, recent Dutch research has shown that the
relationship between the amount of green space in the living environment and self-reported health
is positive, even after controlling for relevant socio-demographic and socio-economic characteristics
(de Vries et al., 2003).
Moreover forests contribute to a better quality of living environment in the cities, for example by
improving air quality and consequently the health of urban residents. The leaves of trees can take
up many pollutants, e.g. ozone, nitric acid vapour, nitrogen dioxide, ammonia, sulphur dioxide and
particles (aerosols and dust). Some of these pollutants can cause serious health problems. Trees
also provide valuable shading from the sun. An individual tree can provide Sun Protection Factor
(SPF) of 6 to 10, which means a level of exposure to ultraviolet radiation of one sixth to one-tenth
of full sun (NUFU, 1999).

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 25

4 Conflicts arising from outdoor recreation and nature tour-

ism and sustainable management of resources and envi-
ronments
The previous section examined the general issues of nature tourism and some of the conflicts that
arise, mainly between over development and damage to the resources from too many visitors.
This section considers the conflicts involved in the management of natural areas, especially forests,
across different parts of the world. Here there are not only conflicts between recreational or tourism
visitors and the natural resource but also among and between recreational activities. This presents
many challenges to managers. However, not all conflicts occur everywhere and there are distinct
regional patterns that emerge from an analysis of different countries. The first part looks at the
situation in Europe which is best known to the authors from work on Cost Action E33. This is
followed by summaries of the situation from other regions.

4.1 Europe
The following review is based on the analysis of a survey which was undertaken for the Cost Action
E33 programme mentioned above. It was the first attempt to produce a picture of the situation
across the whole of Europe and it reflects the situation of the present time. Survey questions were
designed to reflect expert knowledge, in relation to forest functions, forest management, and forest
based recreation management. One survey form was sent to a representative of each country, who
was asked to complete the survey in collaboration with other national experts knowledgeable in
the respective fields (see Figure 10). This type of questioning prevented one single expert from
responding solely on the basis of personal observations and opinions.
The results include the answers from forest practitioners and researchers working within the
respective regional or national forestry administrations of each country (Pröbstl, 2005; Pröbstl
et al., 2007). The survey was addressed to the national representative member of the Cost Action
programme, who was invited to be responsible for the questionnaires in his or her country based
mainly on personal invitations leading to a high response rate (over 80%).

Figure 10: The concept of the expert based survey.

In the following, some results of this survey (Pröbstl et al., 2007) concerning conflicts in recre-
ation management are presented. The first approach showed a rather diverse picture which showed
some basic trends. However, a more differentiated analysis and discussion with the experts was
able to identify significant regional variations (see Figure 11).

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
26 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Figure 11 summarizes the most important types of conflicts across Europe. It can be seen that
in countries which are characterized only by a small amount of forest (for example the U.K.) and
those with an intensive and very productive forestry (such as Finland and Norway) most of the
conflicts occur between “recreation and forest use”, mainly timber harvest activities where health
and safety considerations as well as difficulties in using harvested areas for recreation were cited
as reasons. In densely populated countries the conflicts between different user groups tended to
dominate (for example Belgium, Denmark and Germany). This is because there are often many
user groups competing for space. In the Mediterranean countries and France hunting is considered
as the most severe problem causing conflicts with recreation.

Figure 11: The most important types of conflict identified for each country participating in the survey.

However, analysis of the pattern of conflicts arising from outdoor recreation and nature tourism
and the sustainable management of resources and environments revealed significant regional dif-
ferences. Overall, five regional groups of countries emerged which are characterised by similar foci,
conflicts and management tasks (Figure 12):

• The Atlantic region

• The Central European region
• The Mediterranean region
• The Nordic region
• The Continental region

Below, the main concerns and challenges for each region are described. The relative priority of
these topics is influenced significantly by the overall amount of forest, the population density, the
legal situation, and, especially, access.
The Atlantic Region is characterised by a very low proportion of forest cover per country, usually
in the region of 5–11%. In Iceland, Ireland, Denmark, the U.K. and the Benelux countries, the
provision of recreation opportunities is of utmost importance as forests represent one of the main
types of accessible land use for recreational purposes. The high population density and relatively
low proportion of forest (< 11%) leads to an emphasis on recreation as a major policy objective
for forest management and a subject of a focus both in research and practice. The main challenges
for management are the aesthetic enhancement of plantation forests for the purpose of recreation
and the development of urban forestry (among others, Heytze and Herbert, 1990; McCormack and
O’Leary, 1995; Bell, 1997). Compared to other regions, the main conflicts are crowding and the

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 27

Figure 12: The European forest regions emerging from the analysis.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
28 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

recreational demands of different ethnic groups. In the Benelux countries and in the U.K. the
combination of intensive recreation and nature conservation also poses a special challenge (Bruls
et al., 2004; Roovers et al., 2004). Additional challenges for management are on the one hand the
supply of recreation opportunities and conflict resolution between different user groups, crowding,
and rubbish dumping. On the other hand the increasing demand for an open access to forests
is of increasing relevance for recreation and tourism. Surveys and monitoring of visitor numbers,
changing demands and efforts to ensure that there are accessible forest areas close to where people
live are an integral aspect of forest management.
In the Nordic Region challenges are completely different. These countries contain an extremely
high proportion of forest (up to 69%). In Sweden, Norway, and Finland, multi-functional forestry
must include the traditional “every man’s rights” which include berry picking, mushroom collecting,
and free access for all recreation and sports activities, which are considered of utmost importance
by the entire population (Sievänen et al., 2004). The main conflicts are between forestry and recre-
ation. Large clearcuts and road contruction are mentioned as major problems by many researchers
and managers from these countries. Compared with these issues, the severity and frequency of
other conflicts is considered to be rather low. Forest managers have to deal with an increasing
number of conflicts with the use of snow mobiles in winter, unauthorised motorized camping and
erosion caused by mountain biking. The management concepts differ across the various Nordic
countries. While management in Finland is mainly based on a standardized method for visitor
surveys there is no tradition in Norway for systematic collection of data and users of nature, except
for national surveys organized by Statistics Norway. By contrast monitoring in Norway is primarily
biological monitoring. Management has to deal with the precondition of free access. Therefore
restrictive management actions such as limiting the number of visitors able to visit an area, or the
use of entrance fees to ration visitor numbers are unlikely to be feasible, while softer actions such
as visitor information, signposting and guided tours are more acceptable (Vistad, 2003). In the
Nordic region increasing ecotourism is a new challenge for forest mangement.
In the countries of Central Europe, such as Germany, Switzerland, and Austria, as well as large
areas of France, typically about one third of the area is under forest cover and all countries provide
free access to the forest. Conflicts arise mainly between different user groups (for example between
horse riders and cyclists, or cyclists and hikers) and between recreation demands and nature
conservation priorities. Conflicts exist in areas with greater restrictions from nature conservation
and they predominantly involve outdoor sports. These conflicts also occur in forests close to
urban areas. In the mountain areas, off-piste skiing, back country skiing and snow shoeing as well
as montain biking lead to conflicts. The planning of new recreational infrastructure has a long
tradition in Central Europe. Visitor management is a constant challenge for managers, especially
in and close to densely populated areas. Management and monitoring of recreation mainly occurs
as an integrated task of forest inventory or management planning. Only in special cases is there
independent planning for recreation and nature tourism. New forms of conflict resolution have been
developed using contracts and voluntary agreements with sport associations, especially concerning
rock climbing and cross-county skiing.
The Continental Region (i.e. Poland, the Baltic states, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and others)
face a different set of challenges, partly as a result of the legacy of the Soviet or communist era,
restitution of forest lands to their former owners and rural depopulation. Recreation has always
been an important management concern, but frequently appropriate infrastructure, or controlled
access may be absent. Many prerequisites for more intensive tourism use are also missing. The
restructuring of agriculture, and the widespread conversion of arable land to shrubs and eventually
to forests is leading to significant changes in the rural landscape. The main conflict area is between
recreation and nature conservation. Most of the protected areas have been established in Eastern
Europe during the last 20 or 30 years, many of them in traditional recreational locations, for
example in Latvia and along the Baltic coast line and in mountainous areas. The mountainous areas

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 29

of the Czech Republic, Slovakia and southern Poland are facing increasing problems, especially
with ski touring, cross country skiing, snow shoeing and snow mobiles as well as climbing and
mountain biking. The planning, management and monitoring systems are similar to those used
in the Central region. They are mainly connected with forest inventory and management or with
the management plans for protected areas. Around bigger cities and urban areas, the recreational
planning as well as the management of the recreational infrastructure is more intensive. The most
popular management actions used in these countries are restrictive ones, particularly rules and
regulations, but also prohibitions, although their acceptance by the public appears to be rather
low. Experts in the region also mentioned the education of future management personnel as a
challenge, especially with regard to training in the areas of recreation and or eco-tourism. New
challenges derive from the forest ownership transformation process in these countries.
The Mediterranean Region also contains about one third of its area as forest, but here it is
different type of forest, often being sparse in terms of tree cover and composed of trees suited to
the climate but which are also flammable. Timber production is not important so one of the main
additional uses in forests is tourism, which requires landscapes of high aesthetic quality, and also
leads to further demands such as fire management, the provision of recreational infrastructure, and
the restoration of previously intensively used areas. Rubbish dumping by private individuals was
mentioned by the experts as a “tradition” in almost all Mediterranean countries causing a lot of
problems for forest management. Some areas are currently subject to intensive reforestation, or
at least to the stabilization of marginal forests in semi-arid areas. All these activities also need to
consider demands for nature conservation.
In most of the mediterranean countries there is no independent planning or monitoring of
recreation and nature tourism in forests. In Greece and Italy, for example, recreational planning is
mainly done in special cases, especially around larger cities to provide recreational opportunities.
In Cyprus a close cooperation between the Cyprus Tourism Organization, the Forestry department
and other stakeholders has fostered strategic planning and monitoring of forests, rural tourism and
nature tourism projects. Future challenges were mainly seen in an increasing need for environmen-
tal education, new demands like “nature tourism” and the necessity for visitor monitoring.

4.2 North America

In the U.S.A., with a tradition of strong private property rights and no public access to private land,
the main resources for outdoor recreation have, for a long time, been the public lands managed
by the National Park Service, the U.S. Forest Service, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
and the network of state parks managed by each state. Significant infrastructure development was
put in place several decades ago and the period of the 1980s saw reductions in federal funding
to these agencies. In the U.S.A., the population is set to increase as a result of immigration
and the ethnic mix of the population is also expected to change so that patterns of leisure and
recreation are likely to be different. Health concerns such as the “epidemic of obesity” and the
need to increase the physical activity levels of the American population are also at the forefront
of policies connected with outdoor recreation (Cordell, 2005). Meanwhile, the pressures placed on
well-loved and accessible national parks such as Yosemite lead to severe conflicts of visitor numbers,
activities and the protection and management of natural resources. There have traditionally been
differences between the different management agencies, the National Park Service being concerned
with scenery, nature and recreation management and therefore a more focused remit than the
Forest Service or BLM which each have goals to develop and use a wide range of natural resources.
This, such as timber cutting in old-growth forests of the Pacific North-west has led to conflicts
over resource use and nature conservation, scenic preservation and recreation. Tools to manage
visitors and visitor pressure have featured in the management systems of the agencies for some
time and these continue to be developed and applied. One of the strong points of these approaches

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
30 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Figure 13: A path in the forests of the Troodos Mountains in Cyprus is linked to the nature tourism
strategy of the country, part of an integrated approach.

such as the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum is to connect the nature of the visitor experience
with the type of landscape setting within which this experience takes place. Another tool, Limits
of Acceptable Change is used to manage the changes to the ecology that occur as a result of
high levels of visitor use (Haider, 2004). In addition, given the popularity of motorised vehicles
in the U.S.A., conflicts between these and the natural resources are a constant theme requiring
management action and monitoring.
The U.S. Forest Service has a research programme that undertakes research in to provide
information about recreation use of forests, supply and demand of recreation opportunities, and
impacts of resource management activities and landscape change on recreation activities (USDA,
2006). A broad range of topics are studied including:

• Relationships between ecological conditions and recreation activities: impacts of fire on recre-
ation activities.
• Cultural differences in outdoor recreation use: minority ethnic group participation in outdoor
recreation; access to leisure and urban open space opportunities.
• Psychological and social dimensions of the recreation experience: human values and per-
ceptions associated with recreation activities; sense of place and recreation management;
experiential aspects of wilderness; impacts of criminal activity in forests on recreation; use
of recreation fees; recreation visitor conflicts.
• Recreation assessment and trends: visitor service quality assessment; national recreation as-
sessment and trend analysis (NSRE); national visitor use monitoring (NVUM); scenic quality
assessment.

Many of these activities are reflected in the aspects described in earlier sections and demonstrate
that many of the concerns are common to a wide range of areas around the world.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 31

4.3 Principles of sustainable nature tourism

Given the kinds of possible conflicts described above it is important to be able to develop sustainable
methods for managing recreation and tourism. Metsähallitus, the state Forest and Park Service
in Finland, is responsible for managing most of the country’s protected areas as well as supplying
partly the country’s forest industry. The organisation has developed nine principles which
summarise the key elements of managing sustainable nature tourism in protected
areas (Metsähallitus, 2000):

1. Natural values should be preserved and all activities should promote nature conservation.
Features are small groups; erosion and impacts monitored; nature is the prime reason for the
visit; marked trails; tourism into area with suitable features; nature education and awareness
are central.

2. The environment must be subjected to as little pressure as possible. Every effort is taken to
avoid damage and disturbance; no trace of visitors should be left behind; emissions minimised
and renewable energy sources preferred.

3. Local traditions, cultures and communities must be respected. Visitors are encouraged to
learn about the communities and cultures in the area; local communities are considered in
the provision of information and activities; guides familiar with local conditions.

4. Visitors should increase their understanding and appreciation of nature and cultures. Infor-
mation should be available prior to the visit; information available on arrival, guides well
trained; information and interpretation easily accessible and attractive; visitors are able to
contribute to the management of the area.

5. Improved recreational facilities must be provided for visitors. Needs of visitors considered;
facilities to suit demand and conditions; visitors to enjoy peace and quiet as well as guided
activities; facilities and services developed in cooperation with local businesses.

6. Visitors should be encouraged to enjoy both mental and physical recreation. Facilities pro-
vided for range of visitors. i.e. hikers and bikers as well as casual recreational walkers; easy
and demanding routes available; opportunities for a variety of activities in natural surround-
ings.

7. Local economies and employment must be promoted. Local businesses to be used wherever
possible; employment given to local people wherever possible.

8. Publicity materials should be produced responsibly and carefully. Information must be re-
liable and up-to-date; publicity is conducted openly and interactively and does not work
against nature conservation.

9. Activities must be planned and organised co-operatively. Visitor’s opinions are important;
training organised with local businesses; all stakeholders involved in planning.

In developing a nature tourism operation, it is essential to clearly identify the destination and to
have a unique selling point. The natural assets of a destination play an increasingly important part
in presenting and marketing a tourism experience (Buckley, 2001). If an area is listed as a World
Heritage Site, for example, this indicates globally outstanding natural and/or cultural significance.
This can potentially cause conflicts where an increased number of visitors cause intense pressure
on the infrastructure and support services within the area. Eagles et al. (2000) estimated that in
1996, there were more than 2.6 billion visitor days of recreation activity in the parks and protected

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
32 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Figure 14: A lake in Latvia with a very natural structure and unpolluted water is ideal for bird watching.

areas of Canada and the U.S.A. This level of activity is likely to have major economic, social and
environmental impacts.
It is essential to develop partnerships between tourism, environmental and community interests.
These partnerships all need to have a shared understanding of the processes and benefits but also of
the commitments entailed. A large number of Codes of Conduct for tourism have been developed
by a range of organizations regarding environmental, socio-cultural and political features and
behaviour. Many of these are pertinent to nature tourism: the World Tourism Organisation of the
UN Global Code of Ethics for Tourism (World Tourism Organization, 2001); the United Nations
Environment Programme Principles on the Implementation of Sustainable Tourism (UNEP, 2000);
the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) Ten Principles for Mediterranean Tourism; the Pacific Asia
Travel Association (PATA) Code for Environmentally Responsible Tourism; the WWF Guidelines
for Community-Based Ecotourism Development (WWF, 2001), and the Environmental Guidelines
of the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC, 1998). These codes are designed to ensure that
all the actors involved understand what is trying to be achieved but also that everyone is working
towards the same process and goal. Within the codes, issues such as waste disposal, disturbance to
wildlife and habitats, respecting cultures, supporting education and complying with the country’s
safety standards, are covered.
To be successful and to retain the support of the local community, any nature tourism op-
erations have to provide economic benefits. It is important that these benefits are shared with
the community and not all taken out of the area. Parks often supply the most important part of
the nature tourism experience, but typically capture little of the value of the stream of economic
benefits (Wells, 1997).
Nature tourism depends on a high quality environment to attract visitors. As a result, the
negative effects of tourism need to be minimised. This will also help to reduce conflict with local
communities. Moreover, nature tourism should contribute actively to the conservation of natural
and cultural heritage. If the area is allowed to degrade, either through lack of management or
through over-exploitation, then the area will lose its attractiveness to visitors (Newsome et al.,

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 33

2002). The direct impacts of tourists, such as trampling and litter, have been fairly extensively
studied. However, impacts which are more diffuse, indirect and intermittent which are difficult
and expensive to measure such as waterborne pathogens or interference with plant pollination
ecology are less well-understood (Buckley, 2001). To reduce conflicts and tensions between local
populations and tourists, it is imperative that these effects are also considered and researched.
To be sustainable, it is important that any nature tourism development encourages community
involvement and participation. Local and indigenous communities should be included in planning,
development and operation (Denman, 2002). Local people should be involved from the outset, at
the planning stage right through to gaining the economic benefits of the operation as a result of
employment generated by the project or by being key stakeholders. However, one of the problems
of local community participation is that it can be difficult for it to be equal. Some people choose
not to participate (Ghimire and Pimbert, 1997) or it may not be possible for some to participate
so that they benefit economically. One of the key problems is that tourism may not actually link
well enough to local communities dependent on natural resources and traditional rural livelihoods.
Ghimire and Pimbert (1997) have presented a six-part typology of participation ranging from pas-
sive participation where people are told what will happen with no input to decisions to interactive
participation where people are involved in joint analysis where new local groups are formed or
strengthened and they take control over local decisions and practices (this parcipation ladder is
quite frequent in participatory planning research).

Figure 15: Accommodation at an ecotourist lodge in the Western Ghats of India has been developed with
sustainable principles in mind and provides employment for local people.

All stakeholders should be encouraged to engage in the planning process and in liaison between
tourism enterprises, government bodies and environmental planners. Participatory management is
a key tool in ensuring participation in planning, decision-making and management (Denman, 2002).
One important task is to develop tools and approaches to improve integrating local knowledge into
decision making and planning processes. In developing countries especially, it is important to
encourage management styles based upon local rules and collective action. This should ensure
long-term preservation of national resources as well as a sustained supply of resources required by

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
34 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

nature tourists.

4.4 Management of nature tourism

A number of indicators have been developed to enable tourism stakeholders and nature tourism
operators to assess the sustainability of their activities. These cover issues such as the well-being
of host communities, tourist satisfaction and management of scarce resources. For example, the
World Tourism Organisation produced a book entitled Indicators of Sustainable Development for
Tourism Destinations in 2004 (World Tourism Organization, 2004), the Department for Culture,
Media and Sport (DCMS) produced National Sustainable Tourism Indicators in 2001 (DCMS,
2001) and the Association of Caribbean States (ACS) have developed a set of indicators that are
quantifiable and applicable through a Tourism Sustainability Index in order to create a Sustainable
Tourism Zone for the Caribbean (Simpson and Ladle, 2007). When developing new areas for Nature
Tourism, it is important to consider the carrying capacity of the area, not only in terms of the local
community but also for the visitors. Natural areas are often diverse landscapes with a number
of features attractive to different groups of people for different reasons. However, diversity often
leads to conflict, where visitors who are seeking different experiences find themselves in the same
setting. In the future conflicts will increase between clients seeking for peace and quietness in the
wilderness and clients interested in motorised outdoor activities.
Eagles (2001) suggests that the negative impact of tourism on park resources is less influenced
by absolute numbers of visitors, and more influenced by weak tourism policy, management and
staffing often caused by very low levels of finance. Managers of protected areas worldwide face
the challenge of conserving natural and cultural heritage for future generations, ensuring that
conservation values are not degraded by the current generation’s use and appreciation of these
areas (Buckley, 2001). There is a danger that, by identifying and promoting prominent natural
areas for tourism, the numbers visiting and their associated impacts can actually degrade what
most people value in the area. Visitor use can negatively affect the environment as well as the
quality of visitor experiences. In order to improve any services offered, ensure all stakeholders
are satisfied and the integrity of the environment is maintained, it is essential that strategies and
impacts are monitored, evaluated and reviewed (World Tourism Organization, 2004). It is also
important to undertake market research on the visitors to assess their satisfaction with the area
and facilities. This will enable the development of pragmatic and effective recommendations for
addressing any existing and future problems.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 35

5 Conclusions and research needs for the future

This review paper has presented a wide range of issues that are of concern to policy makers, planners
and researchers at the present time. Given the fast changing social, economic and demographic
conditions as well as the increasing pressures on the environment and the uncertainties around
climate change, the subject of outdoor recreation and nature tourism is one that needs to be kept
continually under review. It is clear that a societies develop, economies mature and people around
the world become more affluent, live longer and have more spare time recreation and tourism
become increasingly important activities. The statistics for the growth of outdoor recreation and
nature tourism reinforce this importance. The review also demonstrates that many of the drivers
of changing levels and types of demand are not completely predictable and that considerable
uncertainties exist in terms of which drivers will continue to have an effect and which may weaken
over time. The nature of the impact of new technology is also uncertain but it is likely to be large
in scale.
In the light of the analysis of trends identified above, what are the research needs for the future?
Each section of the paper has examined different facets of outdoor recreation and nature tourism
and as a result is able to generate a number of research needs:

5.1 The drivers of recreation

As a result of the discussion of the drivers of recreation there are needs for research to strengthen
the base assumptions and to validate the trends as they emerge over the next years. For this a
series of baseline studies from a range of countries followed up by longitudinal surveys conducted
every 5–10 years would help policy makers and planners in the development of their policies and
plans. The discussion on demand monitoring, which is an essential aspect of this kind of study
also throws up several important lines of research:

• Systematic monitoring of the recreation behaviour of the population – national level recre-
ation surveys – sampling individuals or households.

• Systematic recreation monitoring on-site, site specific visitor assessment and visitor surveys.

• Harmonization of key variables for international comparisons.

• Harmonization of methods for national statistics over time, trend construction, forecast mod-
elling to allow international comparison, especially at the pan-European level.

• Development of methodology to suit the changing society: the use of internet survey, GPS-
tracking etc.

• Pressure on natural resources and conflict management because of new activities and tech-
nologies such as motorised recreation in Europe.

• Recreation opportunities and environmental changes such as climate change, rural land-
scapes disturbed by afforestation or uncontrolled housing development, poor quality of water
resources.

• The increasing number of people enjoying nature tourism trips shows no signs of abating
and, if predictions are to be believed, numbers will only continue to rise. As a result, policy
makers, planners and managers are going to have to deal with increasing demand so that
instruments to evaluate and plan for this are needed.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
36 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

5.2 Health and well-being

This short review of the potential effects of nature on health and well-being shows that the evidence
base is increasing but is not strong enough to have a major impact on policy. Gaps in research
were identified in a research mapping study carried out for the U.K. department of Communities
and Local Government (Bell et al., 2006) which showed that this area has as yet a patchy research
record throughout the developed world. Some priorities for research were suggested, in relation to
a number of themes such as:
Economic values:
• Funding mechanisms for green space
• The value of economic regeneration
• Quantification in monetary terms of health benefits (of exercise etc.) e.g. savings to the
health budget
• Costs of crime and vandalism
• The value of local employment provided by green space
Health:
• Benefits in relation to key target groups, especially children, older people and disabled people.
• Longitudinal studies to test and validate health benefits over time
• Barriers to the use of green space for health and well-being
• The effects of risk aversion on levels of use of green space for health and well-being
Social and community:
• The availability of nearby green space for children’s play
• Intergenerational studies into play and the use of green space, as affected by, constrained or
encouraged by parents or grandparents
• The effects of fear and feeling unsafe as barriers to using spaces of different types by different
social groups.
• The difference between actual and perceived levels of crime in different spaces
• The social setting of crime
• Planting for safety
• The use of lighting to increase levels of use and to reduce fear.
Physical aspects
• Accessibilty to green spaces “from the front door” in order to reduce the need to use transport
Management and maintenance
• Maintenance of informal green spaces used a lot for play
• What skills are needed by staff to prepare for current and future demands of management
and maintenance
• Methods of communication and information provision to the wide range of user groups in
different spaces as a means of helping to raise awareness, build confidence and manage risk
and fear.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 37

5.3 Conflicts between recreation and nature tourism on sustainable use

of resources and environments
In the area of conflicts between visitors and the environment the following needs have been iden-
tified:

• To ensure that visitors have as minimal impact as possible it will be necessary to continue
gathering information on the intensity of recreational use that is made on areas and also to
assess the way they behave during their visits. By having a greater understanding of the
benefits gained by individuals of access to natural areas, it will allow planners and managers
to focus their activities and operations more effectively.

• Climate change is perhaps the biggest threat to nature tourism. However, it is an issue
that is beyond the control of recreation and nature tourism planners. Those involved will
need to conduct research into the impacts climate change could have on the environment
and businesses in a range of habitats and regions. It is also important to understand how to
adapt to the changing conditions. Ideally, recreation and nature tourism operators should
also implement mitigation plans so that impact is reduced initially.

• Nature tourism’s continued expansion offers opportunities to generate increased income and
employment, both nationally and in remote rural areas, and to provide increased incentives
for biodiversity conservation in state protected areas and on private lands (Wells, 1997).
However, these must be balanced with the risks of continued environmental degradation and
greater pressure on protected areas, many of which lack the resources for effective manage-
ment and are unprepared for significant growth in visitor numbers (Wells, 1997).

• The development and application of visitor management systems to different regions and for
different circumstances will help to provide planners and managers with more sophisticated
and sensitive tools than they have at present.

• Techniques need to be further developed to enable existing areas to deal with increased
pressures. This may include setting limits on visitor numbers or activities to ensure the
environment remains undamaged.

• Research into the use of technological advancements, so that the development of additional
tourism areas will have less of an impact on the environment and to ensure the sustainability
of the venture in the long-term.

• For some of the conflicts identified, general research is required. However, for certain issues,
research and information needs to be more specific to the region, area or people. For example,
reducing conflicts between local people and nature tourists will be region and resource specific.
It is possible to identify common themes, such as participation, but as each community is
unique, applying general guidelines will also be problematic.

The research in the field described here is increasing all the time and new findings about all
the subjects discussed here constantly emerge. It is the intention to keep this review itself under
review and to revisit it when significant new material affects the conclusions and predictions.

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
38 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

References
Aasetre, J., Vistad, O.I. (2006), “Forests and ‘friluftsliv’ in Norway”, conference paper. Related
online version (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.openspace.eca.ac.uk/costE33/outputs northerneurope.htm. 1

Ashcroft, P. (2002), “Case study: Walking the Way to Health Initiative. Summary of papers”,
National Conference Greenspace and Healthy Living, 14 May 2002, Manchester, conference
paper. 3

Ashley, C., Boyd, C., Goodwin, H. (2000), Pro-poor Tourism: Putting Poverty at the Heart of
the Tourism Agenda, vol. 51 of Natural Resource Perspectives, London (Overseas Development
Institute). URL (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.odi.org.uk/NRP/51.html. 2.7

Bell, S. (1997), Design for Outdoor Recreation, London; New York (E & FN Spon). 1, 4.1

Bell, S., Ward Thompson, C., Findlay, C., Montarzino, A., Morris, N. (2005), “Self Reported Stress
Reduction by Users of Woodlands”, in Forests, Trees, and Human Health and Well-Being, (Ed.)
Gallis, C.T., Proceedings of the 1st COST E39 Conference, October 2005, Thessaloniki, pp.
71–80, Thessaloniki (SIOKIS Medical & Scientific Publishers). Related online version (cited on
23 April 2007):
http://www.e39.ee/en/m-51/c-38/. 3

Bell, S., Montarzino, A., Travlou, P. (2006), “Green and Public Space Research: Mapping and
Priorities”, London (Department for Communities and Local Government). URL (cited on 23
April 2007):
http://www.communities.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1500480. 5.2

Bruls, E., Busser, M., Tuunter, E. (2004), ‘Jewels in the crown’: Good practices Natura 2000 and
leisure, Den Haag (Stichting Recreatie). Related online version (cited on 9 May 2007):
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/nature conservation/useful info/
documents publications/pdf/jewels in the crown.pdf. 4.1

Buckley, R. (Ed.) (2001), Fenner Conference 2001 (Abstracts), Nature Tourism and the Environ-
ment, Canberra, 3–6 September 2001, Canberra (Australian Academy of Science). Related online
version (cited on 7 November 2006):
http://www.crctourism.com.au/CRCBookshop/page.aspx?page id=2&productID=346. 4.3,
4.3, 4.4

Buckley, R. (2003), “The Practice and Politics of Tourism and Land Management”, in Nature-based
Tourism, Environment and Land Management, (Eds.) R., Buckley, C., Pickering, D.B., Weaver,
Papers presented at the Fenner Conference on Nature Tourism and the Environment, held in
Canberra, Australia, 2001, Wallingford; Cambridge (CABI Publishing). 2.7

Burgess, J. (1995), “Growing in confidence: a study of perceptions of risk in urban fringe wood-
lands”, CCP 457, Cheltenham (Countryside Commission). 3

Carr, E. (2006), National Parks and the Modern Movement in the USA, Ph.D. Thesis, Edinburgh
College of Art, Edinburgh. 1

Cordell, H.K. (2004), Outdoor Recreation for the 21st Century: A Report to the Nation. The
National Survey on Recreation and the Environment, State College, PA (Venture Publishing).
2.3, 2.5, 3, 4

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 39

Cordell, H.K. (2005), “Recreation and Tourism Trends Research”, National Outdoor Recreation
Conference, Helsinki, Finland, 10 November 2005, conference paper. Related online version (cited
on 10 November 2006):
http://www.srs.fs.fed.us/trends/NatORC.html. 1.1, 2.1, 2.5, 2.5, 4, 4.2

Cordell, H.K., Teasley, R.J., Super, G., Bergstrom, J.C., McDonald, B. (1997), “Outdoor Recre-
ation in the United States: Results from the National Survey on Recreation and the Environment,
Chapter 2: Outdoor Recreation Participation”, Athens, GA (USDA Forest Service). Related on-
line version (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/trends/fsoutrec.html. 1, 3

Cordell, H.K., Betz, C., Bowker, J.M., English, D.B.K., Mou, S.H., Bergstrom, J.C., Teasley, R.J.,
Tarrant, M.A., Loomis, J. (1999), Outdoor Recreation in American Life: A National Assessment
of Demand and Supply Trends, Champaign, IL (Sagamore Publishing). 2.3, 2.5

OPENspace Research Centre (2004a), “COST Action E33 (Forest Recreation and Nature Tourism):
Objectives”, online resource. URL (cited on 5 November 2006):
http://www.openspace.eca.ac.uk/costE33/objectives.htm. 2.7, 2.7

OPENspace Research Centre (2004b), “Cost Action E33: Forest Recreation and Nature Tourism”,
project homepage. URL (cited on 26 November 2006):
http://www.openspace.eca.ac.uk/costE33/homepage.htm. 1.1

Crick, H.Q.P, Dudley, C., Glue, D.E., D.L., Thomson (1997), “UK birds are laying eggs earlier”,
Nature, 388: 526. 2.2

Dales, B. (2004), “New access rights and responsibilities in Scotland”, conference paper. Related
online version (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.openspace.eca.ac.uk/costE33/outputs scotland.htm. 1

DCMS (2001), “National Sustainable Tourism Indicators: Monitoring progress towards sustainable
tourism in England”, London (Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS)). Related
online version (cited on 7 November 2006):
http://www.culture.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F73BEAA1-B017-4C34-BE75-8C47A127C486/0/
NationalSustainableTourismIndicators.doc. 4.4

de Vries, S. (2000), “Regional Differences in the Demand for and Supply of Nature-Based Recre-
ation within the Netherlands”, in Forests and Society: The Role of Research, Vol. 1: Sub-Plenary
Sessions, (Ed.) Krishnapillay, B. et al., Proceedings of the XXI IUFRO World Congress, 7–12
August 2000, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, pp. 662–673, Vienna; Kuala Lumpur (IUFRO; FRIM).
Related online version (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://iufro-down.boku.ac.at/iufro/congress/congress2000/csc/vol1.pdf. 3

de Vries, S., Verheij, R.A., Groenewegen, P.P., Spreeuwenberg, P. (2003), “Natural environments –
healthy environments? An exploratory analysis of the relationship between nature and health”,
Environment and Planning A, 35(10): 1717–1731, doi:10.1068/a35111. 3

Denman, R. et al. (Ed.) (2002), The World Ecotourism Summit, Québec City, Canada from 19–22
May, 2002, Madrid; Paris (World Tourism Organization; UNEP). URL (cited on 6 November
2006):
http://www.world-tourism.org/sustainable/IYE/quebec/. 4.3, 4.3

DuWors, E., Villeneuve, M., Filion, F.L., Reid, R., Bouchard, P., Legg, D., Boxall, P., Williamson,
T., Bath, A., Meiss, S. (1999), “The Importance of Nature to Canadians: Survey Highlights”,

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
40 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Ottawa, ON (Environment Canada). Related online version (cited on 7 May 2007):

http://www.ec.gc.ca/nature/highlights/highlite.html. 2.3, 1

Eagles, P.F.J (2001), “International Trends in Park Tourism”, EUROPARC 2001, October 3–7,
2001, Hohe Tauern National Park, Matrei, Austria, conference paper. Related online version
(cited on 7 November 2006):
http://www.ahs.uwaterloo.ca/rec/pdf/inttrends.pdf. 2.2, 4.4

Eagles, P.F.J., McLean, D., Stabler, M.J. (2000), “Estimating the Tourism Volume and Value
in Parks and Protected Areas in Canada and the USA”, George Wright Forum, 17(3): 62–76.
Related online version (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.georgewright.org/173eagles.pdf. 4.3

English, D.B.K., Kocis, S.M., Ross Arnold, J., Zarnoch, S.J., Warren, L. (2002), “Visitor Use of
USDA Forest Service Recreation Areas: Methods and Results from the National Visitor Use
Monitoring Effort”, in Monitoring and Management of Visitor Flows in Recreational and Pro-
tected Areas, (Eds.) Arnberger, A., Brandenburg, C., Muhar, A., Proceedings of the conference
held at University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences (BOKU), Vienna, Austria,
January 30 – February 02, 2002, pp. 246–251, Vienna (BOKU/ILA). 2.4

Erkkonen, J., Sievänen, T. (2002), “Standardisation of visitor surveys: Experiences from Finland”,
in Monitoring and Management of Visitor Flows in Recreational and Protected Areas, (Eds.)
Arnberger, A., Brandenburg, C., Muhar, A., Proceedings of the conference held at University of
Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences (BOKU), Vienna, Austria, January 30 – February
02, 2002, pp. 252–257, Vienna (BOKU/ILA). 2.4

ETC (2006), “Tourism Trends for Europe”, Brussels (European Travel Commission). Related on-
line version (cited on 7 November 2006):
http://www.etc-corporate.org/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=100. 2.1,
2.2

European Commission (2000), “Towards Quality Rural Tourism: Integrated Quality Management
(IQM) of Rural Destinations”, Brussels (European Commission). Related online version (cited
on 6 November 2006):
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/services/tourism/studies and publications.htm. 2.7

European Commission (2006), “Eurostat”, institutional homepage. URL (cited on 26 November

2006):
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu. 2.1

Ghimire, K.B., Pimbert, M.P. (1997), Social change and Conservation: Environmental Politics
and Impacts of National Parks and Protected Areas, London (Earthscan Publications). 4.3

Grahn, P., Stigsdotter, U.A. (2003), “Landscape planning and stress”, Urban Forestry & Urban
Greening, 2(1): 1–18, doi:10.1078/1618-8667-00019. 3, 3

Grimsditch, G.D., Salm, R.V. (2006), IUCN Resilience Science Group Working Paper Series, 1,
Gland, Switzerland (The World Conservation Union (IUCN)). URL (cited on 23 April 2007):
http://www.iucn.org/themes/marine/pubs/pubs.htm. 2.2

Haider, W. (2004), “Visitor management frameworks in North America”, 2nd Management Com-
mittee meeting and WGs meeting and Workshop in Edinburgh, Scotland, 31 October – 2 Novem-
ber 2004, conference paper. Related online version (cited on 26 November 2006):
http://www.openspace.eca.ac.uk/coste33/outputs presentations.htm. 4.2

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 41

Halpenny, E., Otte, N.R. (1999), “Not just nature”, Our Planet, 1999(10.1). Related online version
(cited on 5 November 2006):
http://www.ourplanet.com/imgversn/101/otte.html. 2.6
Hartig, T., Mang, M., Evans, G.W. (1991), “Restorative Effects of Natural Environment Experi-
ences”, Environment and Behaviour , 23: 3–26, doi:10.1177/0013916591231001. 1. 3
Hartig, T., Böök, A., Garvill, J., Olsson, T., Gärling, T. (1996), “Environmental influences on
psychological restoration”, Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 37: 378–393. 3
Henley Centre (2005), “Paper 2: Demand for outdoor recreation. A report for Natural England’s
outdoor recreation strategy”, London (Henley Centre/Headlight Vision). Related online version
(cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.countryside.gov.uk/LAR/Recreation/strategy research.asp. 2
Heytze, H., Herbert, L. (1990), “Landscape experience in poplar forests”, in Proceedings of the
XIXth IUFRO World Congress, Montréal, Canada, August 5–11, 1990, pp. 47–60, Hull, QC
(IUFRO). 4.1
Jensen, F.S., Koch, N.E. (1997), Frilutsliv i skovene 1976/77 – 1993/94 , vol. 20 of Forskningserien,
Hørsholm (Forskiningscentret for Skov & Landskap). 2.3, 1, 2.4
Jensen, F.S., Koch, N.E. (2004), “Twenty-five Years of Forest Recreation Research in Denmark
and its Influence on Forest Policy”, Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research, 19(4): 93–102,
doi:10.1080/14004080410034173. 2.3
Jepson, R. (2005), “Country Report UK for Cost E39: Forests, Trees and Human Health and
Wellbeing”, Brussels (COST). Related online version (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.e39.ee/en/countries/c-64/. 1
Kajala, L. (Ed.) (2006), Monitoring Outdoor Recreation in the Nordic and Baltic Countries, vol.
2006:530 of TemaNord, Copenhagen (Nordic Council of Ministers). Related online version (cited
on 7 May 2007):
http://www.norden.org/pub/sk/showpub.asp?pubnr=2006:530. 2.4
Kajala, L., Almik, A., Dahl, R., Dikšaite, L., Erkkonen, J., Fredman, P., Jensen, F.S., Karoles,
K., Sievänen, T., Skov-Petersen, H., Vistad, O.I., Wallsten, P. (2007), Visitor monitoring in
nature areas – a manual based on experiences from the Nordic and Baltic countries, TemaNord,
Copenhagen (Nordic Council of Ministers). Forthcoming. 2.4
Korpela, K., Hartig, T. (1996), “Restorative qualities of favourite places”, Journal of Environmen-
tal Psychology, 16: 221–233. 3
Korpela, K., Sarjala, T. (2005), “Country Report Finland for Cost E39: Forests, Trees and Human
Health and Wellbeing”, Brussels (COST). Related online version (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.e39.ee/en/countries/c-39/. 1
Kweon, B.-S., Sullivan, W.C., Wiley, A.R. (1998), “Green Common Spaces and the Social In-
tegration of Inner City Older Adults”, Environment and Behaviour , 30(6): 832–858, doi:
10.1177/001391659803000605. 3
Lindhagen, A., Hörnsten, L. (1998), “Changes in forest recreation between 1977 and 1997 – a study
of public preferences and behaviour in Sweden”, in Proceedings of AISF-EFI International Con-
ference on Forest Management in Designated Conservation & Recreation Areas, 7–11 October
1998, Florence, Italy, pp. 105–114, Padua (University of Padua Press). 2.5

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
42 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Maas, J., Verheij, R.A., Groenewegen, P.P., de Vries, S., Spreeuwenberg, P. (2006), “Green space,
urbanity, and health: how strong is the relation?”, Journal of Epidemiology and Community
Health, 60: 587–592, doi:10.1136/jech.2005.043125. 3

MacDonald, D., Crabtree, J.R., Wiesinger, G., Dax, T., Stamous, N., Fleury, P., Gutierrez Lazpita,
J., Gibon, A. (2000), “Agricultural abandonment in mountain areas of Europe: Environmental
consequences and policy response”, Journal of Environmental Management, 59(1): 47–69. 2.2

Maetzold, J.A. (2002), “Nature-Based Tourism and Agritourism Trends: Unlimited Oppor-
tunities”, in Future Farms 2002: A Supermarket of Ideas, 15–16 November 2002, Norman,
Oklahoma, pp. 84–89, Poteau, OK (Kerr Centre for Sustainable Agriculture). Related online
version (cited on 7 November 2006):
http://www.kerrcenter.com/publications/2002 proceedings/futurefarms 2002.html.
2.1, 2.2

Mastny, L. (2001), Traveling Light: New Paths for International Tourism, vol. 159 of Worldwatch
Papers, Washington, DC (Worldwatch Institute). 2.6

McCormack, A.G., O’Leary, T. (1995), “A performance approach to the assessment of the aesthetic
resources of forest parks by landscape experts”, in Multiple Use and Environmental Values in
Forest Planning, (Eds.) Hyttinen, P., Kähkönen, A., Pelli, P., Proceedings of the International
Summer Course, Tohmajärvi, Finland, 5–10 June 1995, vol. 4 of EFI Proceedings, pp. 153–168,
Joensuu (European Forest Institute). 4.1

Menzel, A., Fabian, P. (1999), “Growing season extended in Europe”, Nature, 397: 659, doi:
10.1038/17709. 2.2

Metsähallitus (2000), Nature Protection Publications of the Finnish Forest and Park Service. Series
B, 54, Helsinki (Metsähallitus). URL (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.metsa.fi/julkaisut/pdf/luo/b052.pdf. 4.3

Metsähallitus (2006), “Metsähallitus Website”, institutional homepage. URL (cited on 5 November

2006):
http://www.metsa.fi. 2

Morris, N. (2003), “Health, Well-Being and Open Space: Literature Review”, online resource,
OPENspace Research Centre. URL (cited on 27 April 2007):
http://www.openspace.eca.ac.uk/literaturereview.htm. 3

Newsome, D., Moore, S.A., Dowling, R.K. (2002), Natural area tourism: Ecology, impacts and
management, Clevedon; Buffalo (Channel View Publications). 2.6, 4.3

NSRE (2003), “National Survey on Recreation and the Environment 2000–2002 (Interagency Na-
tional Survey Consortium): American’s participation in Outdoor Recreation: Results from
NSRE”, Athens, GA; Knoxville, TN (USDA Forest Service; University of Tennessee). Related
online version (cited on 10 November 2006):
http://www.srs.fs.usda.gov/trends/Nsre/nsre2.html. 2.3, 2.5, 3

NUFU (1999), Trees and Healthy Living, Proceedings of a National Conference, Wolverhampton,
UK, 17 November 1999, Wolverhampton (National Urban Forestry Unit (NUFU)). 3

O’Brien, L. (2005), “Trees and woodlands: Nature’s health service”, Farnham (Forest Research).
Related online version (cited on 7 November 2006):
http://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/forestry/INFD-6J9GC4. 3

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 43

Parsons, R., Tassinary, L.G., Ulrich, R.S., Hebl, M.R., Grossman-Alexander, M. (1998), “The view
from the road: Implications for stress recovery and immunization”, Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 18: 113–140, doi:10.1006/jevp.1998.0086. 3
Pröbstl, U. (2005), “Forests in Balance? Forests under the spell of economical, ecological and
recreational requirements – Considerations about the European Model”, Allgemeine Forst- und
Jagdzeitung, 178(4): 68–73. 4.1
Pröbstl, U., Wirth, V., Elands, B., Bell, S. (2007), Recreation and nature based tourism in European
forests, Berlin (Springer Science). In preparation. 4.1, 4.1
Rauhala, J., Erkkonen, J., Iisalo, H. (2002), “Standardisation of visitor counting – Experiences
from Finland”, in Monitoring and Management of Visitor Flows in Recreational and Protected
Areas, (Eds.) Arnberger, A., Brandenburg, C., Muhar, Proceedings of the conference held at
University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences (BOKU), Vienna, Austria, January
30 – February 02, 2002, pp. 258–263, Vienna (BOKU/ILA). 2.4
Roovers, P., Verheyen, K., Hermy, M., Gulinck, H. (2004), “Experimental trampling and vegetation
recovery in some common forest and heath communities”, Applied Vegetation Science, 7(1): 111–
118. 4.1
Salafsky, N., Wollenberg, E. (2000), “Linking Livelihoods and Conservation: A Conceptual Frame-
work and Scale for Assessing the Integration of Human Needs and Biodiversity”, World Devel-
opment, 28: 1421–1438, doi:10.1016/S0305-750X(00)00031-0. 2.7
Sandur, H., Lepp, K., Soon, A., Maikov, K. (2005), “Country Report Estonia for Cost E39: Forests,
Trees and Human Health and Wellbeing”, Brussels (COST). Related online version (cited on 7
May 2007):
http://www.e39.ee/en/countries/c-26/. 1
Scrintzi, G., Tosi, V., Agatea, P., Flamminj, T. (1995), “Gli Italiani e il bosco. Coordinate quali-
quantitaitve dell’utenza turistica in Italia. (Italians and the woods. The forest recreation demand
in Italy)”, ISAFA Comunicazioni di ricerca, 95(1). Related online version (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://www.isafa.it/scientifica/pubblicazioni/pubblicazioni.htm. 2.3, 1
Seeland, K., Moser, K., Scheuthle, H., Kaiser, F.G. (2002), “Public acceptance of restrictions
imposed on recreational activities in the peri-urban Nature Reserve Sihlwald, Switzerland”,
Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 1(1): 49–57, doi:10.1078/1618-8667-00006. 3
Selwyn, N. (2005), “Review Essay: Studying the Information Society”, Information Society, 21/1:
77–79, doi:10.1080/01972240590895964. 2.1
Sievänen, T. (Ed.) (2001), Luonnon virkistyskäyttö 2000 (Outdoor recreation 2000), vol. 802 of
Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja, Helsinki (METLA). Related online version (cited on 7
May 2007):
http://www.metla.fi/metinfo/monikaytto/lvvi/. 2.3, 1, 2.5
Sievänen, T., Pouta, E., Neuvonen, M. (2004), “Participation in mushroom picking in Finland”,
in Social Roles of Forests for Urban Population, (Eds.) Ito, T., Nobuhiko, T., Tokyo (Japan
Society of Forestry Planning Press; University of Tokyo). 2.5, 4.1
Silvennoinen, H., Tyrväinen, L. (2001), “Luontomatkailun kysyntä Suomessa ja asiakkaiden
ympäristätoiveet (Demand for nature tourism services and the environment in Finland)”,
in Luonnon virkistyskäyttö 2000 (Outdoor recreation 2000), (Ed.) Sievänen, T., vol. 802 of
Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja, pp. 112–127, Helsinki (METLA). 1, 2.7

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
44 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

Simpson, M.C., Ladle, R. (2007), “Implementing sustainable tourism indicators for destinations
using a quantifiable Tourism Sustainability Index”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, submitted.
4.4
Simpson, M.C., Ladle, R., Viner, D., Nicholls, S. (2007), “The vulnerability and resilience of
Caribbean Small Islands States to climate change: A case study from Tobago Tourism Review
International February 2007”, unknown status. In press. 2.2, 3, 2.2
Skov-Petersen, H., Jensen, F.S. (2005), “Monitoring the recreational use of the nature - an inter-
national assessment”, Larnaka, Cyprus, April 21–22, 2005, conference paper. Survey for COST
Action E33, Working Group 2. 2.4
Spencer, D. (1997), “Counterurbanisation and rural depopulation revisited: Landowners, plan-
ners and rural development”, Journal of Rural Studies, 13(1): 75–92, doi:10.1016/S0743-
0167(96)00059-9. 2.2
Statistics Netherlands (1997), “Dagrecreatie 1995/’96 (Day trips 1995/’96)”, Voorburg (Statistics
Netherlands). 2.3, 1
Stueve, A.M., Cock, S.D., Drew, D. (2002), “The Geotourism Study: Phase 1 Executive Summary”,
Washington, DC (Travel Industry Association of America). Related online version (cited on 6
November 2006):
http://www.tia.org/pubs/geotourismphasefinal.pdf. 2.6
Thompson, C.W., Aspinall, P., Bell, S., Findlay, C. (2004), “Local open space and social inclu-
sion: Case studies of use and abuse of woodlands in Central Scotland”, Edinburgh (Forestry
Commission). 3
The International Ecotourism Society (1991), “About Ecotourism: Definitions & Principles”, on-
line resource. URL (cited on 6 November 2006):
http://www.ecotourism.org/webmodules/webarticlesnet/templates/?a=95&z=2. 1, 2.6
Tyrväinen, L. (2001), “Use and valuation of urban forest amenities in Finland”, Journal of Envi-
ronmental Management, 62(1): 75–92. 3
Tyrväinen, L. (2006), “Nature tourism in Finland: Development Possibilities and Constraints”,
conference paper. Related online version (cited on 6 November 2006):
http://www.openspace.eca.ac.uk/coste33/outputs northerneurope.htm. 2.7
Tyrväinen, L., Nousiainen, I., Silvennoinen, H., Tahvanainen, L. (2001), “Rural Tourism in Finland:
Tourists’ Expectation of Landscape and Environment”, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and
Tourism Research, 1(2): 133–149, doi:10.1080/150222501317244047. 3
Tyrväinen, L., Silvennoinen, H., Nousiainen, I. (2002), “Combining forestry and nature-based
tourism in Finland: An analysis of development potentials and constraints”, in Collaboration
and Partnerships in Forestry, Proceedings of IUFRO Division 6 Meeting, 11–17 November, 2002,
Valdivia, Chile, Vienna (IUFRO). CD-ROM. 2.7
Tyrväinen, L., Silvennoinen, H., Kolehmainen, O. (2003), “Ecological and Aesthetic Values be
Combined in Urban Forest Management”, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 1(3): 135–149,
doi:10.1078/1618-8667-00014. 3, 3
Tyrväinen, L., Pauleit, S., Seeland, K., de Vries, S. (2005), “Benefits and Uses of Urban Forests
and Trees”, in Urban Forests and Trees: A Reference Book , (Eds.) Konijnendijk, C.C., Nilsson,
K., Randrup, T.B., Schipperijn, J., pp. 81–114, Berlin et al. (Springer). 3

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism: A European Perspective 45

Tyrväinen, L., Korpela, K., Silvennoinen, H., Ylen, M. (2006), “The importance of nature to
Finns and the effect of the use of green areas on perceived health and restorative experiences”,
in Urban Forestry for Human Health and Wellbeing (Abstract book), (Eds.) Nilsson, K.,
Nielsen, A.B., COST E39 Research Conference / ASEM 2nd Symposium on Urban Forestry,
Copenhagen, 28–30 June 2006, Copenhagen (Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University).
Related online version (cited on 7 May 2007):
http://en.sl.life.ku.dk/KurserOgEfteruddannelse/ASEM-COST2006/
ConferenceProceedings.aspx. 3

Ulrich, R.S., Simons, R.F., Losito, B.D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M.A., Zelson, M. (1991), “Stress recov-
ery during exposure to natural and urban environments”, Journal of Environmental Psychology,
11: 201–230, doi:10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7. 3

UNEP (2000), “UNEP Principles on the Implementation of Sustainable Tourism”, online resource.
URL (cited on 5 November 2006):
http://www.unepie.org/pc/tourism/policy/principles.htm. 4.3

USDA Forest Service (2006), “Research and Development information at the USDA Forest Ser-
vice”, project homepage. URL (cited on 26 November 2006):
http://www.fs.fed.us/research/social science research.shtml. 4.2

Vaage, O.F. (2004), Rapporter, 2004/13, Oslo (Statistics Norway). Related online version (cited
on 7 May 2007):
http://www.ssb.no/emner/07/02/50/rapp 200413/. In Norwegian. 2.3, 1

Vemuri, A.W., Costanza, R. (2006), “The role of human, social, built, and natural capital in
explaining life satisfaction at the country level: Toward a National Well-Being Index (NWI)”,
Ecological Economics, 58: 119–133, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.02.008. 2.1

Vistad, O.I. (2003), “Experience and management of recreational impact on the ground – a study
among visitors and managers”, Journal for Nature Conservation, 11: 363–369, doi:10.1078/1617-
1381-00069. 4.1

Walther, G.-R., Post, E., Convey, R., Menzel, A., Parmesan, C., Beebee, T.J.C., Fromentin, J.-
M., Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Bairlein, F. (2002), “Ecological responses to recent climate change”,
Nature, 416: 389–395, doi:10.1038/416389a. 2.2

Wells, M.P. (1997), Environment Department Papers: Environmental Economics Series, 55, Wash-
ington, DC (World Bank). Related online version (cited on 7 November 2006):
http://www.icrtourism.org/weblibrary.asp. 4.3, 5.3

World Tourism Organization (2001), “Global Code of Ethics for Tourism (GCET)”, online resource.
URL (cited on 9 May 2007):
http://www.world-tourism.org/code ethics/eng.html. 4.3

World Tourism Organization (2004), “Indicators of Sustainable Development for Tourism Desti-
nations: A Guidebook”, Madrid (World Tourism Organization). 4.4

World Tourism Organization (2006), “Tourism Highlights: 2006 Edition”, Madrid (World Tourism
Organization). Related online version (cited on 7 November 2006):
http://www.world-tourism.org/facts/eng/pdf/highlights/highlights 06 eng lr.pdf.
2.1

WTTC (1998), “WTTC Environmental Guidelines”, London (WTTC). 4.3

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2
46 Simon Bell, Liisa Tyrväinen, Tuija Sievänen, Ulrike Pröbstl and Murray Simpson

WWF (2001), “Guidelines for community-based ecotourism development”, Gland (WWF Interna-
tional). Related online version (cited on 9 May 2007):
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/guidelinesen.pdf. 4.3

Living Reviews in Landscape Research

http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2007-2