|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
PAPERBACK Free Resources |
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 103
4.0 REGIONAL STRATEGIES PROGRAM
TOURISM EXPENDITllRE WORKSHEET
One of the objectives of this research was to identify existing tools.for determining the
economic impacts of transportation investments. During the preliminary survey of select DOTs and
STOs one such economic approach was submitted by the Oregon Tourism Division. Although this
approach is deficient in some areas, it is important to acknowledge state-level initiatives to link
transportation and tourism.
OCR for page 104
OCR for page 105
REGIONAL STRATEGIES PROGRAM
TOURISM EXPEIS!DITURE WORKSHEET
FOR EVALUATION OF TOURISM RELATED SHORT LIST PROJECTS
INTRODUCTION
This procedure provides a standard means for assessing the economic
benefits of most tourism-related regional strategy projects. The procedure
was developed by Dean Runyan and Associates and revised slightly by the
Regional Strategies Section.
The procedure should be applied to each of the tourism-related projects in
your ~ 987-89 biennium approved regional strategy as part of your "Strategy
Assessment" and "Biannual Report". (See the Amendment of Approved
Regional Strategies handbook for details on these reports.) It should also be
applied to each project which is being proposed in your 1989-91 regional
strategy amendment as part of the "Economic Impact Analysis" section of the
handbook.
The procedure is suitable for any project where on-site visitation can be
measured, estimated or projected. Both proposed projects and projects
which are at least partially completed can use this procedure.
This procedure is not applicable to marketing projects, hospitality training
programs or other programs which do not involve a facility, event or program
amended by visitors. Call your Regional Coordinator for suggestions on how
to assess the impact of these kinds of projects.
The procedure consists of a worksheet which derives an estimate of the
visitor expenditures associated with a project. Use one worksheet per
project.
Only direct visitor expenditures should be estimated using this worksheet.
Indirect and multiplier effects will be calculated by Economic Development
Department staff with support from the Employment Division. The Economic
Development Department and the Employment Division will also estimate the
direct and indirect jobs associated with these expenditure levels.
Instructions for filling our the worksheet, plus several tables which provide
useful figures, are included.
4-!
OCR for page 106
Please keep the following in mind
.
.
This standardized procedure may fit some projects better than others.
Try to represent each of your projects as accurately as possible and
explain any deviations from the procedure which you make.
If you have data for your area which deviates significantly from that
which is provided and which you would like to use, reference and
explain your sources for these figures.
Projections which are made now will be used in the future to gauge
project success and keep them realistic.
4-2
OCR for page 107
Regional Strategies Program
Tourism Expenditure Worksheet
Project: . Strategy.
I. New Vlslton; Generated by the Project
RS Funds:
Number of Months in New Visitors New Visitors
Your Visitor Season per Month per Year
(1) ~) o)
Peak Season: X .
Ott Peal; Season: );
Total Year
19
Ii: Visitor Ache It Attributable to the Project
Percent of Visitor
Average Length of Visitor Hours per Day Attributable
Stay at Projen Day in Recreation to Project Go)
(1) (a) (3)
Day Visitors:
Overnight Visitors:
III. Visitor Expenditures Assoclated with Me Project
~ of Visit
Day Attri- Average Annual
New Visitors butable Expenditure Ex~en
Percent per Year to Project per Day ditures
(1) ~) (33 (4) (O
Day Visito s ~); ); -
Overnight
Visitors X
Annual
Total 1 00°~
I\'. Comparison to County Totes
Total direct visitor expenditures in the county (1987) (1)
Percent expansion attributable to this project (2)
V. Return or Regional Strategies lovestment
l Aspen ditur eslye ar/Regi on al Strategi es Fun ds (1 )
.
Cor`~ue~ CJ~ back
on
.~
OCR for page 108
\l Assumpbo"
e
11
11
.
OCR for page 109
WORKSHEET INSTRUCTIONS
Enter the name of the project and name of the region. Enter the amount of
Regional Strategies Funds that have been committed to the project, or the
amount of Regional Strategies funding that is being requested.
1. NEW VISITORS ARE USERS GENERATED BY THE PROJECT
(1 ~ Number of months in your visitor season. Fill in the number of months
of your peak season on the first row, and the number of remaining months
in the year on the second row. For a typical summer-oriented attraction, the
peak season would be four months. The two numbers should total to 12.
(2) New visitors per month. Estimate the number of new users or visitors
which the project generates each month of the peak season (on average)
and place this figure on the first row. Count all members of visitor parties,
including children. For a new facility, this probably would be the number of
users or visitors to the facility. For an improvement or expansion of an
existing facility, this would be the new. additional visitors which the
improvements would attract.
If the typical visitor stays at the facility more than one day -- for example if
the facility offers residential classes for students who stay a week or two --
then fill in the number of visitor-days, which equals the number of expected
visitors times the average length of stay (in days) for each. Repeat the
.
process for the off-peak season and place this figure on the second row.
If you know that your facility will attract a large proportion of local residents,
you may want to compensate for this in your estimate of new visitors per
month. If your facility is keeping these residents from traveling outside the
local area for recreation, count them. Otherwise, adjust for focal use and
count only those visitors which will travel to your attraction from outside the
focal area. If you adjust for local use, indicate that you have done so in the
"Assumptions" section of this worksheet.
(3) New visitors per year. For each of the two rows, multiply the first two
columns and place this figure in the third column; then total at the bohom.
This is the volume of travel to the area which directly involves the project.
The column total in 1~3) will be transferred to a location in the worksheet
further below, as explained later in the instructions.
4-5
OCR for page 110
11. VISITOR ACTIVITY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE PROJECT
(1 ) Average length of stay at project. Enter the number of hours (on the
average) which visitors stay at the project each day. If visitors to the area
come just to visit the project, enter the same number as you use in the next
column.
(2) Visitor hours per day typically spent in recreation. For each of the two
rows, enter the total number of hours per day in which visitors in your area
typically participate in some form of recreation activity. In most instances,
this would be between eight and twelve hours; day visitors typically would
spend less than overnight visitors since they spend a portion of their clay
traveling to and from the area.
Be sure to take into account the number of visitors that are just passing
through the area and factor than into your estimate for the length of stay of
day visitors.
If you do not know a specific figure for your area, use eight hours.
(3) Percent of visitor day attributable to project. Compute this by dividing
the figures in column (a) by those in column (2~. The resulting values should
be no greater than 1.0, and for most projects would be between 0.2 and .05.
A higher figure typically would be associated with a project which is largely
responsible for most visitors' travel to the location and which occupies most
of their stay.
. . . .
111. VISITOR EXPENDITURES ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT
(1 ~ Percent distribution of day and overnight visitors. Show the percent
distribution of these two categories of visitors for your area. For many
locations in Oregon, the proport ons are about 50/50; if you have no data for
your area, you should use these figures.
(2) New visitors per year. insert the total from I(3) in each of the blanks.
(3) Percent of visitor day attributable to project. The two figures here are
transferred directly from Il(3~.
(4) Average expenditure per day. Enter the average expenditure per
person for the day and overnight visitors who visit the project. Include all of
their daily expenditures, both on the project site and off-site.
4-6
OCR for page 111
For your reference, Table ~ shows the average daily expenditures from
visitors to each of Oregon's regions; unless you have more specific and
justifiable data available, use the appropriate figures from the table. Do not
add on-site expenditures for your project to the figures provided. This will
cause double counting of jobs and expenditures.
(5) Annual expenditures. Multiply columns Aft, (2), (3) and (4) together
to compute this amount; then total the two rows at the bohom of the column.
The total represents the expenditures in the area which are ahribulable to
visitors to the project.
IV. COMPARISON TO COUNTY TOTALS
(1 ~ Total visitor expenditures in the courtly. Enter the total expenditure
by visitors in your courtly. These figures appear in Table Ill.
(2) Percentage expansion ahribulable to the project. Calculate the
percentage expansion which the project generates in the county by dividing
the total project-related expenditures [~5~] by the total county travel-related
expenditures [IV(1 hi. The more significant the project in the county the larger
this number would be. If the percentage seems disproportionately large or
small, reconsider your worksheet calculations.
V. RETURN ON INVESTMENT
(~) Tourism expenditures per year per Regional Strategies Funds
investment. This is calculated by dividing the total tourism expenditure figure
at the bosom of column Ill(5) by the Regional Strategies Fund request listed
at the top of the worksheet.
Vl. ASSUMPTIONS
Describe the assumptions that you made in arriving at the information which
you used in this model. Where did you get your data? Discuss your reasons
for any deviation from data provided in the worksheet instructions and tables.
Attach additional pages as necessary.
4-7
OCR for page 112
COMMENTS REGARDING VISITOR PATTERNS AND EXPENDITURES
The following are some comments and suggestions for the use of the
expenditure worksheet model.
Base your visitor projections on the experience of comparable facilities or
programs.
Experience is the best guide. When estimating future attendance for a
proposed facility or program, identify several comparable attractions as close
to your location as possible, or attractions in a similarly sized community, and
investigate their visitor patterns. How many visitors per year do they see?
What is the breakdown by peak and non-peak months? Where do these
visitors come from? How long do they stay at the attraction? Is the
attraction a primary destination that draws visitors to the area, or one of
several things which most visitors do while in the area?
The answer to these and similar questions provide some of the best
guidance for predicting the volume and characteristics of visitors which a
new facility or program will attract.
Use realistic demand estimates.
Inflated statements about visitation or attendance can be embarrassing
when, at a later time, you are asked to compare your actual performance
with your predictions. Overblown forecasts can lead to unrealistic
expectations and. when the oroiect or Droaram is underway, the perception
that the project is a failure when in fact it is performing adequately.
---I-~ -my ~ r - -J- - - - - ~ - --
Adjust visitor expenditure levels, if necessary, to properly represent the types
of visitors attracted.
if your project or program specifically targets a particular type of visitor, e.g.,
a camper or a charter boat angler, use a per-day expenditure figure for that
particular type of traveler if such information is available.
4-8
OCR for page 113
PRIORITIES AND LIMITATIONS
This worksheet is intended to provide a basis for estimating the visitor
expenditures associated with tourism-related regional strategy projects. This
information is used to help predict and report job impact.
In order to prepare a standardized framework such as this, a number of
simplifying assumptions were made, resulting in certain limitations on the
methodology. This section reviews the major assumptions and discusses
the sensitivity of the impact projections to them.
Net Economic Benefits
Net economic benefits of a project -- consisting of visitor expenditure sand
the associated employment -- are attributed to a project by measuring or
projecting net new visitation for that project. The portion of a day which a
visitor spends at the project is used to adjust the expenditure totals to
represent the impact of just the project.
This approach implies that a causal relationship exists: the project will lead
to net new visitation, leading in {urn to expenditure and employment gains.
If demand exists or can be generated in Oregon's primary travel markets,
then the assumption is reasonable that facilities or programs will lead to
additional visitor volume and the associated economic impacts. There may
be some lag, however, before these economic benefits are felt.
Substitution Effects
Several factors can mitigate economic impacts of this type. First, a
substitution effect can occur whereby visitation at the new project occurs at
the expense of visitation at other attractions in the area. To the extent that
this occurs, the net economic benefits are diminished; if there is complete
substitution, there is no net benefit. In the short run, such substitution effects
can be large. In the long run, assuming that the project significantly
enhances the locality or region as a visitor attraction, overall visitation should
increase, and substitution effects will diminish. - " ' '- "
typically, 't Is very d~tt~cult to
attribute long-range increases in visitor traffic to any particular attraction,
facility or transportation change; one must assume that each significant
project contributes its complementary share to an area's attractiveness.
4-9
OCR for page 114
Export Income
This analysis considers all visitor expenditures to be economic benefits,
irrespective of visitors' origin. Since only a portion of these visitors are from
outside Oregon, only a portion of the economic benefits represent new,
"export" income to the state.
Most visitor expenditures do derive from outside the communities or counties
in which the regional strategy projects are located and, therefore, represent
new economic benefits from the perspective of these communities.
If an attraction will receive a large proportion of local use, the estimate of
new visitors may be adjusted accordingly, as described in i(2) of the
instructions. This adjustment will help compensate for the distortion.
Difficulty of Making Attendance Projections
Making accurate estimates of future visitation for many new facilities or
programs is difficult, particularly if there are no nearby comparable facilities
or programs. In this situation, it is sometimes usefu'to make use of a range
of estimates (e.g., a low, intermediate and high estimate), calculate impacts
for each, an discuss the factors which influence the likelihood of each impact
level.
Danger of Relying Solely on the Expenditure Mode! for Economic
Impact Information
The expenditure mode! provides useful information, but should only be
considered as one part of the total picture of a project's performance.
Projects will have economic benefits which are not measured by this model.
This mode! does not account for: a project's contribution to an improved
quality of life in the region; the business development impact of visitors that
later start a business or do business in Oregon; the educational value of a
project; and other factors.
When reporting on or describing projects, remember to describe as many
of these factors as possible. Do not rely on the expenditure mode! and the
resulting job impact information as the sole indicator of economic
performance.
4-10
OCR for page 115
TABLE 1
AVERAGE DAILY VISITOR EXPENDITURES
The following are average daily expenditures per person for travelers to the
nine regions in Oregon. Separate figures are shown for day and for
overnight visitors. The figure for each region represents the current mix of
overnight visitors for that region (e.g. , the proportion of campers, hose!
guests, those staying with friends and relatives, etc.), the mix of in-state and
out-of-state travelers, and the typical activities for each area. This data is
from the Oregon Tourism Division's ~ 988 study of Oregon travel and tourism,
with the values adjusted to ~ 989.
AVERAGE DAILY EXPENDITURES BY REGION, 1989
Region
Expenditures*
Day Overnight
WilIamehe Valley $ 26 $ 37
North Coast 25 48
Central Coast 25 42
South Coast 25 41
Portland Area 26 53
Southern 30 43
Central 24 41
Northeast 28 38
Southeast 27 29
* Expenditures are in dollars per person per day.
4- ~ ~
OCR for page 116
TABLE 11
VISITOR ATTRACTIONS ATTENDANCE
The following attendance figures are for those attractions in Oregon which
responded to the survey distributed as part of the 1988 Oregon Tourism
Division's study of travel and tourism, plus several additional facilities which
did not respond to the survey but for which data was available in Dean
Runyan and Associates files.
These figures have not been confirmed by the facilities listed and should be
considered estimates only. In addition, attendance during 1989 is up for a
number of these facilities; check with those facilities in your area for current
attendance levels.
ATTENDANCE AT OREGON ATTRACTIONS, 1988
Attraction
1988 Attendance
Albany Regional Museum
Bandon Historical Society
Butte Creek Mill
Canby Depot Museum
Caples House Museum
Cascade Locks Historical Museum
CastIe/Flippen House
Center for Art & Ecology
Children's Museum
Columbia River Maritime Museum
Coos County Historical Museum
Coos Art Museum
Cottage Grove Historical Museum
Crater Rock Museum
Crater Lake National Park (1987)
Crook County Historical Society
Depot Museum Complex
Douglas County Museum of History
East Linn Museum
Eastern Oregon Museum
FaveIt Museum of West & Art
Fort Stevens St. Park Military Museum
Fort CIatsop National Memorial
Fraizer Farmstead Museum
Grants Pass Museum of Art
Gresham Historical Society
HarIow House Museum
Harney County Historical Museum
4-12
3,500
6,315
35,000
253
600
9,652
2,400
700
105,400
89,943
6,220
15,000
2,000
1,200
480,000
3,430
1,650
25,000
4,000
3,000
7,204
180,000
201,000
2,000
1 0,000
500
900
1 787
OCR for page 117
High Desert Museum
Hoover-Minthorn House Museum
Homer Museum
Jefferson County Museum
Junction City Historical Society
Kam Wah Chung Museum
Klamath County Museum
Lane County Historical Museum
LincoIn County Historical Society Museums
Mark O. Hatfield Marien Science Center
McLaughlin House
Mission Mill Museum
MolalIa Area Historical Society
Oregon Cabaret Theater
Oregon Trail Regional Museum
Oregon Shakespeare Festival
Oregon Maritime Center & Museum
Original Wasco Co. Courthouse
Pau'densen Arctic Museum
PendIeton Woolen Mills
Pitiock Mansion
Portland Art Museum
Prehistoric Gardens
Rogue Gallery
Schminck Memorial Museum
Schneider Museum of Art
Sea Lion Caves
Silka South Slough National Estuarine Reserve
Southern Oregon Historical Society
Springfield Museum
Storefront Theater
Tillamook Cheese
TroutUale Rail Depot Museum
UmatilIa County Historical Society Museum
University of Oregon Museum of Art
Wallowa County Museum
Washington Park Zoo
Washington County Museum
Wildlife Safari
WilIamede Science & Technology Center
Woobville Museum Inc.
World Forestry Center
4-13
99,210
1,600
42,500
300
267
2,716
14,800
~ 5,992
13,501
371,000
12,000
14,018
356
1 0,000
9,527
342,000
3,000
3,944
9,000
15,000
65,000
150,000
50,000
600
700
20,000
250,000
15,000
135,000
6,000
48,000
683,312
400
3,297
48,400
11,000
987,Q23
4,000
172,000
80,000
4,000
39,104
OCR for page 118
TABLE 111
VISITOR EXPENDITURES BY COUNTY, 1987*
COUNTY
TRAVEL
EXPENDITURES
BAKER
BENTON
CLACKAMAS
CLATSOP
COLUMBIA
COOS
CROOK
CURRY
DESCHUTES
DOUGLAS (EAST)
DOUGLAS (WEST)
GILLIAM
GRANT
HARNEY
HOOD RIVER
JACKSON
JEFFERSON
JOSEPHINE
KLAMATH
LAKE
LANE (EAST)
LANE (WEST)
LINCOLN
LINN
MALHEUR
MARION
MORROW
MULTNOMAH
POLK
SHERMAN
tlLLAMOOK
UMATILLA
UNION
WALLOWA
WASCO
WASHINGTON
WHEELER
YAMHILL
TOTAL
$ 18,287,000
23,216,O00
120,351,000
107,612,000
12,554,000
29,936,000
5,543,000
36,387,000
97,737,000
38,603,000
12,874,000
768,000
7,822,000
6,932,000
15,295,000
84,131,000
14,370,000
27,944,000
38,110,000
7,087,000
154,917,000
21,975,000
151,353,000
27,173,000
14,390,000
65,600,000
4,403,000
383,866,000
8,820,000
4,442,000
38,404,000
21,291,000
14,712,000
6,910,000
21,370,000
128,217,000
768,000
21,445,000
$1,795,615,000
* Source: The Economic Impact of Travel In Oregon (1989) prepared for
Oregon Tourism Division by Dean Runyan and Associates, Portland, Oregon.
4-14
OCR for page 119
Representative terms from entire chapter:
regional strategies
