Outdoor Recreation and Adventure Tourism: Unique but Allied Industries
Saved in:
| Title: | Outdoor Recreation and Adventure Tourism: Unique but Allied Industries |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Bailey, Andrew W., Kang, H. K., Lewis, T. Grant |
| Source: | Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership. 2017 9(2):244-247. |
| Availability: | Sagamore Publishing LLC. 1807 North Federal Drive, Urbana, IL 61801. Tel: 800-327-5557; Tel: 217-359-5940; Fax: 217-359-5975; e-mail: journals@sagamorepub.com; Web site: http://js.sagamorepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 4 |
| Publication Date: | 2017 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Outdoor Education, Adventure Education, Recreational Activities, Tourism, Industry, Individual Characteristics, Socioeconomic Status, Surveys, Participation, Statistical Analysis |
| Geographic Terms: | Tennessee (Chattanooga) |
| DOI: | 10.18666/JOREL-2017-V9-I2-8262 |
| ISSN: | 1948-5123 |
| Abstract: | Outdoor recreation and adventure tourism are overlapping industries serving similar clientele. While descriptive marketing research exists for both industries (George Washington University School of Business [GW], Adventure Travel Trade Association [ATTA], & Xola Consulting [XC], 2010; Outdoor Foundation [OF], 2014), there is no clear distinction between those who recreate routinely in their home region and those who travel a significant distance for adventure activities. As such, national reports on outdoor recreation participation (cf. OF, 2014) are useful as economic indicators, but not very instructive for industry policy and practice. The purpose of this study was to contrast descriptive statistics and participation patterns of adventure tourists with active local residents attending an annual outdoor event. The findings demonstrate that there are differences of which both industries should be aware. For example, while outdoor recreation is often portrayed as an upper-class activity, that only held true for tourists in this study. Poorer local residents were involved in more outdoor activities than were residents in higher income classes. This and other atypical findings draw attention to the need for regional data to supplement national reports. |
| Abstractor: | ERIC |
| Number of References: | 3 |
| Entry Date: | 2018 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1168187 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | Outdoor recreation and adventure tourism are overlapping industries serving similar clientele. While descriptive marketing research exists for both industries (George Washington University School of Business [GW], Adventure Travel Trade Association [ATTA], & Xola Consulting [XC], 2010; Outdoor Foundation [OF], 2014), there is no clear distinction between those who recreate routinely in their home region and those who travel a significant distance for adventure activities. As such, national reports on outdoor recreation participation (cf. OF, 2014) are useful as economic indicators, but not very instructive for industry policy and practice. The purpose of this study was to contrast descriptive statistics and participation patterns of adventure tourists with active local residents attending an annual outdoor event. The findings demonstrate that there are differences of which both industries should be aware. For example, while outdoor recreation is often portrayed as an upper-class activity, that only held true for tourists in this study. Poorer local residents were involved in more outdoor activities than were residents in higher income classes. This and other atypical findings draw attention to the need for regional data to supplement national reports. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1948-5123 |
| DOI: | 10.18666/JOREL-2017-V9-I2-8262 |
