National Outdoor Recreation Data Sources: Caveat Emptor

1
National Outdoor Recreation Data Sources Caveat
Emptor
Michael A. Schuett, Texas A M University
Jiaying (Jenny) Lu, Texas A M University Rod
Warnick, University of Massachusetts National
Association of Recreation Resource
Planners 6/3/07 Austin, TX
2
Acknowledgements

• We would like to thanks the Center for
  Socioeconomic Research and Education for their
  technical and financial support

3
Introduction

• Outdoor recreation participation information can
  be difficult to obtain interpret
• Google seems to be the main option
• Several choices, some known, some not

4
Introduction (contd)

• Impetus for study TX statewide trails plans
• Collect it yourself or use existing data
• Primary data
• Tailored to objectives,
• trends, control
• , expertise,
• resources, time

5
Introduction (contd)

• Secondary data
• Cheaper, meets needs, more than a Dollar
  Store solution
• Less flexibility details, availability of raw
  data

6
Purpose of the Study

• Examine selected outdoor recreation data
• Objectives
• Compare and critique
• Data Sources
• Methods
• Findings

7
Method

• Seven sources chosen reviewed
• Based on activities, access, year, scope
• Variables examined Source, history, activities,
  data collection, sample, items, cost, access
• Sources On-line, documents, raw data

8
Data Sources

• Recreation Roundtable (RRT)
• National Survey on Recreation the
  Environment (NSRE)
• Simmons Market Research Bureau (Simmons)
• Super Study of Sports Participation (SSSP)
• Outdoor Recreation Participation Study (P-Study)
• Lifestyle Market Analyst (LMA)
• Sports Participation in 2005 National Sporting
  Goods Association (NSGA)

9
Table 1. Methodology of Seven Data
Sources
1 Frequency of Participation (number of times
several times weekly, several time monthly, once
per month, less often, never) 2 Frequency of
Participation (actual number of days or trips) 3
Access Fee varies upon membership, of
activities and survey areas selected. Many
university or public libraries subscribe to these
datasets and make them available for students and
researchers
10
Table 1. Methodology of Seven Data Sources
(contd)
1 Data collected from U.S. households by
inserting questionnaires into the packaging of
consumer goods. 2 Type of outdoor activities
participated during the last 12 months Frequency
of Participation (actual number of times) 3
Access Fee varies upon membership, of
activities and survey areas selected. Many
university or public libraries subscribe to these
datasets and make them available for students and
researchers.
11
Table 2. National Participation Percentage (Cross
Section)
1Multiple activities, total not given
12
Table 3. Rank Order by Activity
13
Table 4. National Participation Comparison
14
Summary of Results

• Several differences in participation rates
• RRT 2003, NSRE 2000, and NSGA 2005 had some of
  the higher percentages
• In the rank ordering, there are quite a few
  differences as well

15
Results (contd)

• Ex. In P-Study 2005, the Bicycling participation
  rate was ranked 1, while Walking or Swimming was
  ranked 1 in other sources (e.g., LMA 2003,
  Simmons 2001)
• Interpretation of multiple activities is
  challenging, i.e., fishing

16
Discussion

• Apples Apples Apples Oranges
• Differences in data collection methods, sample
  size/age, response rates, questions, and data
  accessibility
• Some unknowns sampling list, size determination
  representative nature of respondents
• Additional data are available beyond activity
  participation, i.e., visits to public lands,
  lifestyle profiles, volunteering.

17
Discussion (contd)

• Source used will make a difference can be used
  to inflate/deflate specific findings, some more
  sports-oriented.
• Trend data can be problematic year activities
  RRT one of the better ones 1994-2003. Activities
  have been added over time.
• Data have been used for SCORP plans, outdoor
  recreation planning audience driven
• These sources can help outdoor recreation
  managers, business owners marketers be more
  discerning in examining outdoor recreation trends

18
Implications Future Research

• Examine utility value of these data sources
• Who is using them, how often, and how?
• Secondary data has incredible value for social
  scientists (e.g., recreation, tourism,
  population)
• Investigate differences, i.e., sampling, data
  collection
• Proprietary hurdles
• BE cautious about generalizing
• More data needed
• Seasonal participation
• Volume
• Trends

19
Future Research (contd)

• What sources should/will public managers the
  private sector continue use in the future?
• How do/will these data sources impact outdoor
  recreation policy?
• Some next steps more detailed analysis on
  participants, activity clusters (e.g., LMA
  Simmons), media use, geography values

20
Thank you!