Nature-Based Tourism Modelling

The final case study was a nature-based tourism potential model developed in Australia for

application within the Grampians National Park (GNP) in western Victoria. The park is

91

approximiately 46 by 88 kilometres in area and is west of the city of Melbourne. Grampians National

Park has very attractive scenery consisting of rugged sandstone ridges and with roughly 50 walking

trails it possesses great tourism/recreational potential.92 Model data is gathered at the primary level

(survey results) and then information is assessed and relevant data is used in the resultant model. “It is

anticipated that using the tourism potential model will help to identify new opportunities for tourism

growth in the region, particularly in the south. The model has particular application in planning for

nature-based tourism, and will assist in identifying locations that are both attractive, environmentally

resilient and can form part of an interesting and diverse series of nature-based tourist attractions

93

within close proximity to each other.” Initial data for this tourism potential model concentrated on

values of tourism attractiveness and levels of attractiveness for the purposes of the model were

determined by questionnaires distributed to tourists. These surveys set “...out a method for

determining and quantifying what tourists collectively perceive as attractive and therefore consider

worthwhile visiting. To determine levels of perceived attractiveness, a questionnaire was administered

to 120 tourists and visitors to the region. From the evaluation of the questionnaires, measures of

attractiveness throughout the region were then determined as part of the developed tourism

attractiveness index.”94 With many sources of information being incorporated into this model there are

assumptions that must be made with the data and generalization must occur.

The first such assumption that was made with the existing data was that there was a link

between the personality of potential tourists and their respective landscape preferences as discovered

by two researchers in 1986, Abello and Bernaldez. Tourism attractions “...act as drawcards and

therefore as nodes for potential environmental impact.” This means that the model assumed that

tourism development would have an environmental impact on the land and as such this formed the

95

rationale for the environmental resiliency model component. Areas that have a diversity of tourism

96

attractions were assumed to be more attractive to tourists. In terms of tourist attractions, the

97

infrastructure that supports these attractions must be seen as tourist attractions as well. The

environmental resiliency model, a key component of the tourism potential model, assumed that the

98

susceptibility to environmental damage will decrease with increasing elevation. To help create

suitable grid cell sizes it was also assumed that visitors could cross a 5-6km area within a single day

visit.99

29

As well, scenic viewsheds were an integral part of the model and scenic viewpoints were assigned an

attractiveness level from the intersection of a rendered scenic viewshed with topographic features

from basemaps such as hydrology, vegetation types, slope. These features such as hydrology, and

100

slope where features deemed important to both good and bad views. A ground digital elevation

(DEM) model was used in the final mode, and rock outcrops, curvature and refraction corrections, and

tree canopy height corrections were made to this DEM.101 There were also many data assumptions that

were made with the environmental resiliency model. Firstly, if the environmental resilient areas are

included in the tourism attractiveness analysis than the total number of highly attractive ranked

102

mapsheets was reduced. In addition, the diversity of tourist attractions and the attractive areas and

103

resilient areas (found in proximity to each other) were all auto-correlated. Data assumptions also

occurred in response to survey results. The survey influenced the model because the results assumed

that natural attractions, waterfalls, scenic views, geological formations, and walking tracks were the

most important features, while infrastructure like public facilities and information centers were not

important attractions. Within the study area, Grampians National Park, specialized activities like

boating and rock climbing were not favoured and foreign tourists were unfamiliar with attractions

outside of the most-visited areas.104

There are many sources of data that this particular model required and this data was the result

of an extensive research and tourist consultation process. The two main data components of the output

tourism potential model are an environmental resiliency model, meant to account for environmental

impacts caused by tourists, and a tourism attractiveness model, which clarifies tourist aesthetic

105

preferences which are combined to create the final model. Data for the tourism attractiveness model

comes from perceived attractiveness to tourists as determined by a tourist questionnaire distributed to

120 visitors to the study area in Grampians National Park. From the results of this questionnaire the

106

previously mentioned attractiveness polygons were built within the GIS.

Next, actual tourism

attractions were incorporated. This data included nature based attractions (rivers, scenic vistas,

waterfalls, interesting geomorphology, and plants) and cultural attractions (historic sites, important

buildings, golf courses, tennis courts, scenic look-offs, picnic areas, and boating facilities).107 In terms

of tourism attractiveness, vegetation data was used extensively. “Using photographs of each of the

ecological vegetation classes in the analysis, respondents were asked to identify those communities of

108

greatest or least attractiveness.” The last significant data source used was the Land Conservation

Council of Victoria (LCC) report of 1997 which “lists the historic and cultural features for south-west

Victoria including the GNP (LCC, 1997)...the report acknowledges the tourism potential of the many

and varied historic places throughout the region.”109