outdoor recreation regional variation 250803 - metla

Sievänen, Pouta & Neuvonen 2003

Regional variation in Outdoor Recreation

in Finland

Tuija Sievänen Eija PoutaMarjo Neuvonen


Content of review

• how people recreate in different parts of the country

• similarities and differences of outdoor recreation behavior by populations in different regions

• construction of regional groups based on outdoor recreation behavior


Information needs and benefits

Regional planning

• land use• use of natural resources and

forests• tourism development


Regions in Finland

1 Uusimaa

2 Varsinais-Suomi

3 Satakunta

4 Häme

5 Pirkanmaa

6 Kaakkois-Suomi

7 Etelä-Savo

8 Pohjois-Savo

9 Pohjois-Karjala

10 Keski-Suomi

11 Etelä-Pohjanmaa

12 Pohjanmaa

13 Pohjois-Pohjanmaa

14 Kainuu

15 Lappi

123 4

51112 13 14

10 8 976

15


RegionalCharacteristics

Southern Finland• urban population• mildest climate• cultural

landscape• municipality

recreation areas

Northern Finland• rural, high

unemployment• long, cold winter• fells, forested• plenty of state

land

Western Finland• rural, • flat landscape,

plenty of openlandscape(fields and peatlands), rivers

Eastern Finland• rural, high

unemployment• cold winter,

warm summer• plenty of lakes

and forests


Factors affectingregional differences

Naturalenvironment

• forested areas• number and

character of water areas

• climate; number of days of sunshine, rainand snow

Social and culturalenvironment

• populationstructure

• habits, ’culturalclimate’

• supply of recreationservices


Data and methods

LVVI – population survey-telephone interview and mail

questionnaire; – sample of 12000– response rates 84 and 65

Statistical data of municipalities(population, climate, naturalresources)

Statistical methods– descriptive statistics using regional

weights– cluster analysis for regional

grouping


Participation in Outdoor Recreation

Participation in • outdoor recreation in general• most popular activities such as

pleasure walking, walking dogangling or rowboating

! there are no regionaldifferences


Cross-country skiing

more than 4030-40less than 30

participation rate, %



more than 70 55-70less than 55

Picking wild berries


Picking mushrooms


more than 5040-5030-39less than 30


Fishing with nets




Forest work in leisure time

0 5 10 15 20

UusimaaVarsinais-Suomi

SatakuntaHäme

PirkanmaaKaakkois-Suomi

Etelä-SavoPohjois-Savo

Pohjois-KarjalaKeski-Suomi

EteläPohjanmaaPohjanmaa

PohjoisPohjanmaaKainuu

Lappi



Ice-fishing




Snowmobiling

participation rate, %more than 2010-20less than 10


0 50 100


SatakuntaHäme




Etelä-PohjanmaaPohjanmaa

PohjoisPohjanmaaKainuuLappi

Proportion of visits, %

Municipality area State land Private land or water area

Recreation close to home according to land ownership of visited area


% of population30-34

35-38

39-42

43-46

Participation in nature trips


0 5 10 15 20 25


SatakuntaHäme





Pohjois-PohjanmaaKainuu

Lappi

% of nature trips

Regional distribution of nature trips


0 10 20 30 40 50


SatakuntaHäme





Pohjois-PohjanmaaKainuu

Lappi

% proportion of nature trips

Trips to summer cottage

Boating trips

Skiing trips

The most important recreationactivity during the nature trip to

region


Grouping of regionsaccording to outdoor

recreation participation

• The variables used for grouping are the regionalmeans of participation ratesof the most popular outdooractivitities

• Cluster analysis

• Four groups of regions: ’major recreational regions’


Urban FinlandLake FinlandWestern FinlandWilderness Finland

Major recreational regions


Outdoor activities

in major recreational regions

Urban Finland: • swimming in natural waters, spendingtime at summer cottage

Lake Finland

• fishing with nets, cross-country skiing , picking mushrooms

Western Finland• bicycling, downhill skiing

Wilderness Finland• hunting, picking wild berries, snowmobiling


Group means

Urban Lake West Wilderness p-value

• recreation visitsclose to home per year

161,8 a

183,6b

150,8a

158,6a, b

0,0004

• nature trip daysper year

26,5 a

18,2b

24,7a, b

32,2 a, b

0,0288

Participation frequencies in majorrecreational regions

• Comparison of group means by analysis of varianceand multicomparisons by Tukey’s tests• If the group has the same index (a or b), their meansdo not differ on 5 % risk level

Number of


Summary• People in Eastern Finland take a

benefit of lakes and forests-aremost eager to fish, pick wildberries and mushrooms and skicross-country

• People in Northern Finland aremost keen on hunting

• In Southern, most urbanisedFinland, Uusimaa and Pirkanmaa regions, people use most activelyrecreation areas and trailsmanaged by municipality

• Urban people participate mosteagerly in nature trips, ruralpeople in north use most days for nature trips


Discussion• ’major recreational regions’

area useful for prognosis of participation

• the future of regional outdoor recreationstatistics - are theyneeded?

• the small number of observations limitspossibilities to analyse– participation of less

participated activities– nature trips in regions of small

populations


Discussion• Weaknesses of grouping of

regions1) regions themselves are for

administrative use and theydo no follow either natural orcultural environmentalboundaries

2) some of the statistics/information of variables are of poor quality: – a lot missing data or not accurate

measurements

– no information at all on municipal level.– the most severe shortages concern the

supply of outdoor recreation services orindicators of cultural factors


THANK YOU!

www.metla.fi/metinfo/monikaytto/lvvi


Group/s, whichparticipate less ormore than average

p-value(for chi^2

–statistic)less more

walking for fitness - 2 < 0,0001

walking dog - 4 0,0012

bicycling, tourbicycling

- 3 < 0,0001

spending time at summer cottage

- 1 < 0,0001

boating 3 2 < 0,0001

swimming 3, 4 1 < 0,0001

hunting 1 2, 3, 4 < 0,0001

fishing 1, 3 2, 4 < 0,0001

picking wild berries 1 2, 3, 4 < 0,0001

picking mushrooms 3, 4 1, 2 < 0,0001

cross-country skiing 1 2, 3, 4 < 0,0001

downhill skiing - 3 0,0012

snowmobiling 1 2, 3, 4 < 0,001

Major recreational regions accordingto participation rates of outdoor activities1=Urban Finland, 2=Lake Finland-Suomi, 3=Western Finland, 4= Wilderness Finland


Variables separating regions

Variables Function 1 Function 2 Function 3

Days of snow cover 0,746 0,008 - 0,109

Maximum depth of snow 0,688 - 0,034 0,152

Number of rainy days 0,289 - 0,097 - 0,193Municipal land area 0,401 0,189 0,324

Proportion of water areas 0,216 - 0,767 - 0,091

Proportion of forested areas 0,443 0,296 - 0,575

Municipality on coast - 0,190 0,315 0,069

Recreation trails (km) - 0,137 0,038 0,300Proportion of denselypopulated areas - 0,261 0,166 0,426

Unemployment rate 0,509 - 0,232 0,163Proportion of inhabitantswith higher education - 0,255 0,089 0,413

Proportion of retired inhabitants 0,207 - 0,199 - 0,239

Group centroids

Urban Finland - 0,917 0,097 0,191

Lake Finland 1,263 -1,474 - 0,257

Western Finland 0,495 1,317 - 0,995

Wilderness Finland 4,548 1,353 0,900

Eigenvalue 2,052 0,754 0,201

% of variance 68,3 25,1 6,7

Canonical correlation 0,820 0,656 0,409

Wilks� lambda 0,156 0,475 0,833χ²-statistic 8327,0 3333,1 818,8

p-value < 0,0001 0,0001 0,0001Original grouped casescorrectly classified, % 83,4

n 4489


Nature trips

• Trips to Lapland differ fromothers on following: – high total costs (215 €)– duration of the nature trip

in average (7 days)– travel time and distance to

destination longer thanelsewhere

outdoor recreation regional variation 250803 - metla

Documents