National Parks are significant markers in the tourism attraction system and represent an important supply of recreation opportunities for the clients of the nature-based tourism industry. In this study, we analyze income elasticities among visitors from two major nationalities at Fulufjället National Park (FNP)—a cross-boundary park between Sweden and Norway—to see if this tourism product is a luxury or not. Modeling demand with a Tobit model, we find that visiting this National Park is close to a luxury, but results also show that elasticities differ across both income and nationality: FNP is more likely to be a luxury good among low-income Germans and high-income Swedes. The article concludes with a discussion on policy and management implications from these results.
BalmfordAGreenJMHAndersonM. (2015) Walk on the wild side: Estimating the global magnitude of visits to protected areas. PLOS Biology13(2): e1002074. DOI: 10. 1371/journal. pbio. 1002074.
2.
BanksJBlundellRLewbelA (1997) Quadratic Engel curves and consumer demand. Review of Economics and Statistics79: 527–539.
3.
BarquetABridJOstiL. (2011) An analysis of tourists’ expenditure on winter sports events through the Tobit censorate model. Tourism Economics17(6): 1197–1217.
4.
BergstromJCCordellHKAshleyGA. (1990) Economic impacts of recreational spending on rural areas: A case study. Economic Development Quarterly4(1): 29–39.
5.
BomanMFredmanPLundmarkL. (2013) Outdoor recreation - a necessity or a luxury? estimation of Engel curves for Sweden. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism3–4: 49–56.
6.
BridaJBuksteinDGarridoN. (2012) Cruise passengers’ expenditure in the Caribbean port of call of Cartagena de Indias: A cross-section data analysis. Tourism Economics18(2): 431–447.
7.
DownwardPLumsdonLWestonR (2009) Visitor expenditure: The case of cycle recreation and tourism. Journal of Sport and Tourism14(1): 25–42.
8.
DriverBBrownPJStankeyGH. (1987) The ROS-planning system: Evolution, basic concepts, and research needs. Leisure Sciences9: 201–212.
9.
EaglesP (2014a) Research priorities in park tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism22(4): 528–549.
10.
EaglesP (2014b) Fiscal implications of moving to tourism finance for parks: Ontario provincial parks. Managing Leisure19(1): 1–17.
11.
EaglesPFJMcLeanDStablerMJ (2000) Estimating the tourism volume and value in parks and protected areas in Canada and the USA. George Wright Forum17(3): 62–82.
12.
FredmanPHörnsten FribergLEmmelinL (2007) Increased visitation from national park designation. Current Issues in Tourism10(1): 87–95.
13.
FredmanPRomildUEmmelinL. (2009) Non-compliance with on-site data collection in outdoor recreation monitoring. Visitor Studies12(2): 164–181.
14.
FredmanPSandellK (2009) Protect, preserve, present – The role of tourism in Swedish national parks. In: WarwickFHallCM (eds), Tourism and National Parks. International Perspectives on Development, Histories and Change. Routledge, Contemporary Geographies of Leisure, Tourism and Mobility, New York.
15.
FredmanPWikströmD (2015) Besök och besökare i Fulufjällets nationalpark sommaren 2014 (med jämförelser åren 2001 och 2003), ETOUR, rapport. Mid-Sweden University, Östersund, Sweden. May 2015.
16.
FredmanPYuanM (2011) Primary economic impacts at three spatial levels: The case of Fulufjället National Park, Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism11: 74–86
17.
Garín-MuñozT (2009) Tourism in Galicia: Domestic and foreign demand. Tourism Economics15(4): 753–769.
18.
GarmsMFredmanPMoseI (2016) Travel motives of German tourists in the Scandinavian mountains: The case of Fulufjället National Park. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism17(3): 239–258.
19.
GhalwashTM (2008) Demand for environmental quality: An empirical analysis of consumer behavior in Sweden. Environmental and Resource Economics41: 71–87.
20.
HailuAGaoL (2012) Research note: Recreational trip timing and duration prediction. Tourism Economics18(1): 243–251.
21.
HallCMBoydSW (2005) Nature-Based Tourism in Peripheral Areas: Development or Disaster?Clevedon: Channel View Publications.
22.
HammerTMoseISiegristD. (2016) Parks of the Future! Protected Areas in Europe Challenging Regional and Global Change. Munich: Oekom.
23.
HaukelandJVGrueBVeistenK (2010) Turning national parks into tourism attractions: Nature orientation and quest for facilities. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism10(3): 248–271.
24.
HuhtalaM. (2007) Assessment of the local economic impacts of national park tourism: The case of Pallas-Naturhistorisk National Park. Forest Snow and Landscape Research, 81(1/2): 223–238.
25.
KajalaLAlmikADahlR. (2007) Visitor Monitoring in Nature Areas – A Manual Based on Experiences from the Nordic and Baltic countries, Tema Nord 2007:537. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers, pp. 205.
26.
KimWKimTGazzoliG. (2011) Factors affecting the travel expenditure of visitors to Macau, China. Tourism Economics17(4): 857–883.
27.
LeiperN (1990) Tourist attraction systems. Annals of Tourism Research17(3): 367–384.
28.
MayerMMullerMWolteringMArneggerJHubertJ (2010) The economic impact of tourism in six German national parks. Landscape and Urban Planning, 97(2): 73–82.
29.
MayerM (2014) Can nature-based tourism benefits compensate for the costs of national parks? a study of the bavarian forest national park, Germany. Journal of Sustainable Tourism22(4): 561–583.
30.
MelenbergBvan SoestA (1996) Parametric and semi-parametric modelling of vacation Expenditures. Journal of Applied Economics11(1): 59–76.
31.
Naturvårdsverket (2015) Besökarundersökning i Sveriges nationalparker. Resultat från sommaren 2014. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, report 6687. Stockholm.
32.
NeuvonenMPoutaEPuustinenJ. (2010) Visits to national parks: Effects of park characteristics and spatial demand. Journal for Nature Conservation18: 224–229.
33.
ÖdnerACandemirAKumralN (2009) An empirical analysis of the determinants of international tourism demand: The case of izmir. European Planning Studies17(10): 1525–1533.
34.
PawlowskiTBreuerC (2012) Expenditure elasticities of the demand for leisure services. Applied Economics44(26): 3461–3477.
35.
PindyckRSRubinfeldDL (1998) Econometric Models and Econometric Forecasts. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
36.
SandbrookCG (2010) Local economic impact of different forms of nature-based tourism. Conservation Letters3: 21–28.
37.
SanteramoF (2015) Research note: Promoting the international demand for agri-tourism: Empirical evidence from a dynamic panel data model. Tourism Economics21(4): 907–916.
38.
SievänenTArnbergerADehezJ. (2008) Forest Recreation Monitoring – a European Perspective. Metlantyöraportteja / Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute79: 9–13.
39.
van LoonRRouwendalJ (2013) Vacation behaviour: Frequency, destination choice and expenditures. Tourism Economics19(5): 1005–1026.
40.
VickersSJRenandF (2003) The marketing of luxury goods: An exploratory study – three conceptual dimensions. The Marketing Review3(4): 459–478.
41.
Wall ReiniusSFredmanP (2007) Protected areas as attractions. Annals of Tourism Research34(4): 839–854.
42.
WallstenP (2003) The “inside-out” process. A key approach for establishing Fulufjället National Park in Sweden. Mountain Research and Development23(3): 227–229.
43.
WeilerSSeidlA (2004) What’s in a name? extracting econometric drivers to assess the impact of national park designation. Journal of Regional Science44: 245–262.
44.
WooldridgeJM (2010) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data, 2nd ed. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States.
45.
ZachrissonASandellKFredmanP. (2006) Tourism and protected areas: Motives, actors and processes. International Journal of Biodiversity Science and Management2: 350–358.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
