Interpretation in protected areas can help reach conservation goals and inspire a new generation of knowledgeable and dedicated park supporters. However, few research projects have examined this connection in a comprehensive manner. This 2011 study evaluated perceived knowledge, interest, appreciation, and advocacy impacts from interpretive programs at Miquelon Lake Provincial Park (MLPP), Alberta, Canada. Of 497 respondents, 19.7% attended an interpretive program. Among attendees, 89% rated the programs as excellent or very good, and most agreed that interpretation increased knowledge about nature (88%), interest in future programs (87%), and appreciation for MLPP (82%). Somewhat fewer but still a majority of attendees agreed that interpretation increased their desire to support AB Parks (71%), their awareness of environmental issues (69%), and their desire to help the environment (61%). Attendees (and nonattendees to a lesser extent) supported the role of interpretation in the park. The key constraints for not attending were lack of awareness, awkward timing, and being too busy. Park interpretation at MLPP appears to generate positive impacts related to the environment, regarding learning, awareness, appreciation, and a desire to help.
AbsherJDGraefeAR (1997) Trip motives of interpretive program attendees and nonattendees. Journal of Interpretation Research2(1): 55–56.
2.
Ajzen (1991) The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes50: 179–211.
3.
Alberta Community Development (2003) Camper Satisfaction Survey: How Are We Doing? Miquelon Lake Provincial Park, Edmonton, AB: Alberta Community Development.
4.
BallantyneRPackerJ (2005) Promoting environmentally sustainable attitudes and behaviour through free-choice learning experiences: What is the state of the game?Environmental Education Research11(3): 281–295.
5.
BallantyneRPackerJBeckmannE (1998) Targeted interpretation: Exploring relationships among visitors’ motivations, activities, attitudes, information needs and preferences. The Journal of Tourism Studies9(2): 14–25.
BeckmannEA (1999) Evaluating visitors’ reactions to interpretation in Australian national parks. Journal of Interpretation Research4(1): 5–19.
8.
BentonGM (2009) From principle to practice: Four conceptions of interpretation. Journal of Interpretation Research14(1): 7–31.
9.
Canadian Environmental Advisory Council (1991) A Protected Areas Vision for Canada, Ottawa, ON: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
10.
CarrusGPassafaroPBonnesM (2008) Emotions, habits and rational choices in ecological behaviours: The case of recycling and use of public transportation. Journal of Environmental Psychology28: 51–62.
11.
Chandool N (1997) Participation in park interpretive programs and visitors’ attitudes, norms, and behavior about Petrified Wood Theft. MSc Thesis, Virginia State University, USA.
12.
CoghlanAKimAK (2012) Interpretive layering in nature-based tourism: A simple approach for complex attractions. Journal of Ecotourism11: 173–187.
13.
DavisSKThompsonJL (2011) Investigating the impact of interpretive signs at neighborhood natural areas. Journal of Interpretation Research16(2): 55–66.
14.
DuerdenMDWittPA (2010) The impact of direct and indirect experiences on the development of environmental knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology30(4): 379–392.
15.
FalkJH (2006) An identity-centered approach to understanding museum learning. Curator49(2): 151–166.
16.
FalkJHGillespieKL (2009) Investigating the role of emotion in science center visitor learning. Visitor Studies12: 112–132.
17.
ForestellPH (1993) If Leviathan has a face, does Gaia have a soul?: Incorporating environmental education marine eco-tourism programs. Ocean & Coastal Management20: 267–282.
18.
GoodrichJLBixlerRD (2012) Getting campers to interpretive programs: Understanding constraints to participation. Journal of Interpretation Research17(1): 59–70.
19.
Government of Alberta (2009) Plan for Parks 2009–2019, Edmonton, AB: Government of Alberta.
20.
Government of Alberta (2010) Parks Division Science Strategy, Edmonton, AB: Government of Alberta.
21.
HalpennyEA (2010) Pro-environmental behaviours and park visitors: The effect of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology30(4): 409–421.
22.
HamS (2009) From interpretation to protection - is there a theoretical basis?Journal of Interpretation Research14(2): 49–57.
23.
HamSWeilerB (2007) Isolating the role of on-site interpretation in a satisfying experience. Journal of Interpretation Research12(2): 5–24.
24.
HarrisonMBanksSJamesJ (2010) An evaluation of the impact of river guide interpretation training on the client’s knowledge and interest regarding the environment. Journal of Interpretation Research15(1): 39–43.
25.
HeHChenJ (2012) Educational and enjoyment benefits of visitor education centers at botanical gardens. Biological Conservation149(1): 103–112.
26.
HendeeJDawsonC (2009) Wilderness Management: Stewardship and Protection of Resources and Values, 4th ed. Golden, CO: Fulcrum Publishing.
27.
HowardJ (2000) Research in progress: Does environmental interpretation influence behaviour through knowledge or affect?Australian Journal of Environmental Education15/16: 153–156.
HughesK (2013) Measuring the impact of viewing wildlife: Do positive intentions equate to long-term changes in conservation behaviour?Journal of Sustainable Tourism21(1): 42–59.
30.
HughesMMorrison-SaundersA (2005) Influence of on-site interpretation intensity on visitors to natural areas. Journal of Ecotourism4(3): 161–177.
31.
HughesMHamSHBrownT (2009) Influencing park visitor behavior: A belief-based approach. Journal of Park & Recreation Administration27(4): 38–53.
32.
HvenegaardGTShultisJButlerJR (2009) The role of interpretation. In: DeardenPRollinsR (eds) Parks and Protected Areas in Canada: Planning and Management, 3rd ed. Don Mills, ON: Oxford University Press, pp. 202–234.
33.
HwangSLeeCChenH (2005) The relationship among tourists’ involvement, place attachment and interpretation satisfaction in Taiwan’s national parks. Tourism Management26(2): 143–156.
IoM (2012) Testing a model of effective interpretation to boost the heritage tourism experience: A case study in Macao. Journal of Sustainable Tourism21: 900–914.
36.
KathD (2009) Botanical pollution: Report on a pilot invasive species education program. InterpScan32(4): 11–12.
37.
KimAKAireyDSzivasE (2011) The multiple assessment of interpretation effectiveness: Promoting visitors’ environmental attitudes and behavior. Journal of Travel Research50: 321–334.
38.
KnopfRC (1981) Cognitive map formation as a tool for facilitating information transfer in interpretive programming. Journal of Leisure Research13: 232–242.
39.
KohlbergL (1976) Moral stage and moralization: The cognitive-developmental approach. In: LickonaT (ed.) Moral Development and Behaviour, New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 31–53.
40.
LackeyBKHamSH (2003) Contextual analysis of interpretation focused on human-black bear conflicts in Yosemite National Park. Applied Environmental Education & Communication2: 11–21.
41.
LeeWHMoscardoG (2005) Understanding the impact of ecotourism resort experiences on tourists’ environmental attitudes and behavioural intentions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism13: 546–565.
42.
Machnik LK, Wright BA and Hammitt WE (2006) Perceptions and cognitions from an interpretive talk: Comparing visitor responses to expert reviews. In: Proceedings of the 2006 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium, GTR-NRS-P-14. Bolton Landing, NY: USDA Forest Service, pp. 509–516.
43.
MadinEMPFentonDM (2004) Environmental interpretation in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park: An assessment of programme effectiveness. Journal of Sustainable Tourism12: 121–137.
44.
ManningR (2011) Studies in Outdoor Recreation: Search and Research for Satisfaction, 3rd ed. Corvallis OR: Oregon State University Press.
45.
MarionJLReidSE (2007) Minimizing visitor impacts to protected areas: The efficacy of low impact education programmes. Journal of Sustainable Tourism15(1): 5–27.
46.
Matthews J (2011) Season-end Report – Miquelon Lake Provincial Park. Report, Miquelon Lake Provincial Park, September.
47.
MoscardoG (1999) Making Visitors Mindful: Principles for Creating Sustainable Visitor Experiences through Effective Communication, Champaign, IL: Sagamore.
48.
MunroJKMorrison-SaudersAHughesM (2008) Environmental interpretation evaluation in natural areas. Journal of Ecotourism7: 1–14.
49.
OramsM (1994) Creating effective interpretation for managing interaction between tourists and wildlife. Australian Journal of Environmental Education10: 21–34.
50.
Ortiz M (2007) Motivations for attending ranger-led interpretive programs in Yosemite National Park. MSc Thesis, Stephen F. Austin State University, USA.
51.
PeakeSInnesPDyerP (2009) Ecotourism and conservation: Factors influencing effective conservation messages. Journal of Sustainable Tourism17: 107–127.
52.
PettyREMcMichaelSBrannonLA (1992) The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion: Applications in recreation and tourism. In: ManfredoMJ (ed.) Influencing Human Behavior: Theory and Applications in Recreation, Tourism and Natural Resources Management, Champaign, IL: Sagamore, pp. 77–101.
53.
PorterALHowardJL (2002) Warning visitors about the potential dangers of dingoes on Fraser Island, Queensland, Australia. Journal of Interpretation Research7(2): 5163.
54.
PoudelSNyaupaneGP (2013) The role of interpretative tour guiding in sustainable destination management: A comparison between guided and nonguided tourists. Journal of Travel Research52: 659–672.
55.
PowellRBHamSH (2008) Can ecotourism interpretation really lead to pro-conservation knowledge, attitudes and behavior? Evidence from the Galapagos Islands. Journal of Sustainable Tourism16: 467–489.
56.
PowellRBKellertSRHamSH (2009) Interactional theory and the sustainable nature-based tourism experience. Society and Natural Resources22: 761–776.
57.
RandallCRollinsR (2006) The kayak tour guide: An important influence on national park visitors. InterpScan31(4): 5–9.
58.
ReignerNLawsonSR (2009) Improving the efficacy of visitor education in Haleakala National Park using the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Interpretation Research14(2): 21–45.
59.
RoggenbuckJW (1992) Use of persuasion to reduce resource impacts and visitor conflicts. In: ManfredoMJ (ed.) Influencing Human Behavior: Theory and Applications in Recreation, Tourism, and Natural Resources Management, Champaign, IL: Sagamore, pp. 149–208.
60.
SchliephackJMoyleBWeilerB (2013) Visitor expectations of contact with staff at a protected site. Annals of Leisure Research16: 160–174.
61.
SharpeGW (1982) An overview of interpretation. In: SharpeGW (ed.) Interpreting the Environment, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 3–26.
62.
SharpeGWOdegaardCHSharpeWF (1994) A Comprehensive Introduction to Park Management, 2nd ed. Champaign, IL: Sagamore.
63.
SkibinsJPowellRSternM (2012) Exploring empirical support for interpretation’s best practices. Journal of Interpretation Research17(1): 25–44.
64.
SternMPowellRHockettKS (2011a) Why do they come? Understanding attendance at ranger-led programs in Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Journal of Interpretation Research16(2): 35–52.
65.
SternMPowellRCookC (2011b) The benefits of live interpretive programs to Great Smoky Mountains National Park. Park Science27(3): 56–60.
66.
StewartEJHaywardBMDevlinPJ (1998) The “place” of interpretation: A new approach to the evaluation of interpretation. Tourism Management19(3): 257–266.
67.
TildenF (1977) Interpreting Our Heritage, 3rd ed. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
68.
TsangNKFYeungSCheungC (2011) A critical investigation of the use and effectiveness of interpretive services. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research16: 123–137.
69.
TubbKN (2003) An evaluation of the effectiveness of interpretation within Dartmoor National Park in reaching the goals of sustainable tourism development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism11(6): 476–498.
70.
VaskeJJDonnellyMP (1999) A value-attitude-behavior model predicting wildland preservation among voting intentions. Society & Natural Resources12(6): 523–537.
71.
WeilerBHamSH (2010) Development of a research instrument for evaluating the visitor outcomes of face-to-face interpretation. Visitor Studies13(2): 187–205.
72.
WeilerBSmithL (2009) Does more interpretation lead to greater outcomes? An assessment of the impacts of multiple layers of interpretation in a zoo context. Journal of Sustainable Tourism17(1): 91–105.
73.
WolfeR (1997) Interpretive education: An under-rated element of park management?Research Links5(3): 11–12.
YuY-TDeanA (2001) The contribution of emotional satisfaction to consumer loyalty. International Journal of Service Industry Management12(3/4): 234–250.
