-rf-
ing at fesst 3Q% post-consumer content
-------
-------
A METHOD TO QUANTIFY
ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS
OF SELECTED LEISURE ACTIVITIES
IN THE UNITED STATES
Prepared For:
Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agettcy
Washington, DC 20460
Prepared by:
Abt Associates Inc.
55 Wheeler Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
under contract # 68-W-99-042
Page i
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The study is an initial step by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to quantify
the environmental impacts of leisure activities. It is part of a larger effort at EPA to
assess the environmental impacts of important economic sectors and to understand
how the technical, economic, and institutional constraints of companies and
organizations contribute to those impacts. EPA's ultimate goal is to forge on-going
sector partnerships that support continuous improvement in the environmental
performance of industry sectors.
For the purposes of this study, "leisure activities" are defined as the sum of tourist
activities and recreational activities undertaken buy the American Public. "Tourism"
refers to recreational activities by participants who travel at least 50 miles from home
or spend at least one night away from home. "Recreation" describes activities close
to the participant's home. Although it is not commonly thought of as a leisure
activity, we also include business travel because it is commonly considered part of
tourism.
Leisure activities generate a significant and growing share of U.S. economic activity.
In 1997, direct spending on leisure activities - tourism, recreation and business travel
- was between $436 billion and $512 billion, according to our calculations based on
data published by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. In 1997, tourism expenditures
Page iv
-------
represented between 3.3% and 4.1% of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. From
1992 to 1997 tourism spending grew at an average annual rate of 6.9% while the
gross domestic product (GDP) grew at an average annual rate of S.6%.1 Spending on
leisure activities is expected to continue to grow both in absolute terms and as a
portion of the economy as a whole.
Leisure activities are closely tied to the natural environment. Natural attributes such
as lakes, beaches, mountains, or wilderness are often the foundation of local and
regional tourism and recreation businesses. However, large numbers of visitors can
overwhelm the ability of local infrastructures and ecosystems to supply resources and
process wastes. The environmental impacts from tourists and recreationists can
damage or even destroy the natural attributes that tourism and recreation depend on.
Careful management and planning, based on an understanding of the economic and
environmental impacts of leisure activities, can support development that is both
economically and environmentally sustainable.
In this study, we develop a methodology for quantifying environmental impacts of
specific leisure activities, which may then be compared among the activities or
compiled to give a broader measure of impacts from the sector as a whole. This
"bottom up" method was chosen because of the wide variety of leisure activities. We
further separated the impacts of the activities themselves from the impacts of
supporting businesses such as transportation, lodging, restaurants, and retail.
We applied this methodology to ten specific leisure activities. These activities are
only a portion of the overall leisure activities sector. They were chosen because data
were available for them and because together they represent a significant portion of
the spending in the sector. The activities are: skiing, fishing, hunting, boating,
golfing, casino gambling, amusement/theme parks, historic places and museums,
Survey of Current Business, July 2000.
Page v
-------
conventions and conferences, and waterside, recreation (which includes any visits to
freshwater or the coast for the primary purpose of being near; the water, e.g. for
swimming but not including fishing or boating).
We measured the environmental impacts of these ten leisure activities according to
nine environmental indicators: water use, biological oxygen.demand of wastewater,
total suspended solids in wastewater, energy use, air pollution (hydrocarbons, carbon
monoxide, nitrogen oxides), greenhouse gas emissions, and municipal solid waste
generation. The economic impacts of the activities were measured by the single
indicator of direct spending by participants.
Highlights of our results are: .
In general, the amount of hotel lodging is the most important factor in
determining water and energy use. Exceptions arise when specific activities
require significant quantities of water (e.g., skiing and golf) or electricity use.
Quantities of municipal solid waste generated are closely tied to the number of
meals in restaurants that can be attributed to a specific activity.
In general, air emissions for activities are determined primarily by the number
and length of automobile trips taken by participants. One exception is
boating activity which has high air emissions arising from boat engines.
Page vi
-------
Greenhouse gas emissions are strongly influenced by the distance traveled and
by the number of nights at a hotel. High greenhouse gas emissions from these
support activities are a result of the relatively intense use of fuel and
electricity, respectively.
This study has several limitations. First, not all leisure activities are included in the
model. Second, our results are reported on a national level. The actual effects on
local ecosystems will depend on the initial health, sensitivities, and other stressors of
those ecosystems. Third, the model and the results give total, rather than net impacts,
of recreational and tourist activities. For example, we do not compare these impacts
to the impacts of, say, staying home and watching TV or staying with friends or
relatives. With the exception of greenhouse gas emissions, which are quantified for
electric energy production, the model does not quantify indirect environmental
indicators of tourism and recreation, for example, the impacts of new roads built to
accommodate visitors. Indirect economic effects are also not included. Future work
could overcome these limitations.
EPA began this study to better understand the size and nature of the economic and
environmental impacts of tourism and recreation, and to establish a baseline for
measuring the impacts in the future. In doing this we have compiled an extensive
database of information on these industries, and we have developed a tool for
analyzing the data. It is our hope that others interested in this sector will build on this
work to foster the sustainable development of tourism and recreation industries.
Page vii
-------
-------
1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The overarching purpose of this report is to establish a foundation of knowledge to
help understand the environmental impacts of selected leisure activities. EPA intends
to stimulate dialogue and generate interest in the environmental issues surrounding
these activities. We hope this study will highlight potential environmental problems
and opportunities and contribute to future studies that would further help to promote
the sustainability of tourism and recreation activities. With a common starting point,
interested parties can then embark in designing and implementing solutions.
This study provides a basis for beginning a long-term effort to develop a
comprehensive set of information on tourism and recreation industries. It is an initial
step by the EPA to learn more about a portion of the U.S. economy that is significant
and growing quickly and has the potential for wide-ranging environmental impacts.
The report starts by describing what is meant by tourism and recreation, followed by
brief descriptions of potential environmental impacts, then a description of the
methodology developed to represent some of the environmental impacts, and finally a
presentation of some preliminary findings using this methodology.
The term "leisure activities" encompasses large portions of the travel, tourism and
recreation industries. For the purposes of this study, recreational activities carried out
Pagel
-------
close to home would be considered "recreation." The same activities carried out
away from home would be considered tourism. Specifically, recreational activities
carried out more than 50 miles from home or involving at least one overnight stay
away from home are considered to be tourism. This definition of tourism is used by
the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) and the Travel Industry Association.
Business travel is also considered a type of tourism by this definition.
Americans spend enormous sums of money pursuing leisure activities: engaging in
recreational activities, traveling to sites, staying overnight, eating out, and shopping.
The full economic impact of leisure activities is difficult to estimate. The Bureau of
Economic Analysis (BEA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce estimates that
between $278 and $343 billion, or between 3.3% and 4.1% of the U.S. Gross
Domestic Product comes from expenditures on tourism. Business travel in the United
States contributes another $115 and $119 billion, and local recreational expenditures
add between $43 and $50 billion. All together, direct spending on U.S. tourism and
recreation in 1997 was estimated at roughly $436 and $512 billion.2
Tourists' expenditures support many businesses. These businesses pay taxes,
purchase materials and hire employees, who, in turn, make additional expenditures.
When these multiplier effects are added to the economic picture, we can conclude that
spending on tourism accounts for between $1.2 trillion and $ 1.4 trillion in the United
States.3 By all estimates the leisure sector, comprised in large part of tourism and
recreation businesses, is economically significant and increasingly so. In 1997, the
tourism industry grew at 6.9% per year, 1.3% faster than the U.S. economy.4
2Survey of Current Business, July 2000
3Memo from Jared Creason, US EPA, dated December 7, 2000.
4Survey of Current Business, July 2000
Page 2
-------
Tourism and recreation are closely tied to local environmental conditions. While they
depend on the quality of the environment, they can also result in a host of
environmental problems. Poorly
planned development can
damage the natural environment.
Large numbers of visitors can
overwhelm the ability of local
infrastructures and ecosystems to
provide amenities and process
wastes. State and local
governments are increasingly
taking steps to avoid or minimize
these effects by using prevention
and control options, such as land use plans; environmental impact assessments;
legislative, regulatory, and enforcement measures; training and education; research
and monitoring; and community partnerships (USEPA, 1995).
The National Park Service estimates that $10
billion in direct and indirect expenditures, as
well as 200,000 jobs, were created by the 273
million visits in 1993 to National Parks alone
(NFS, 1997). In addition, the National Park
Service estimates that park visits each year
contribute $5.5 billion annually to local
economies. When visits to land managed by
other agencies, state and local parks, and private
recreation areas are taken into consideration, the
National Park Service estimates that these
expenditures exceed $22 billion
(ORCA/SGMA, 1995).
Because of the importance of tourism and recreation to the nation's quality of life and
economy, and because environmental protection plays a critical role in sustaining
recreation resources, the EPA is working to identify and assess the interrelationships
among the environment, recreation and economic health, and to educate industry,
governments and recreation participants about these links (USEPA, 1995). EPA
hopes these efforts will lead to continued and expanded partnerships among EPA,
industry, and communities aimed at increasing revenue while decreasing
environmental impacts.
EPA does not intend to use this study as a basis for federal regulation of the tourism
and recreation sector. While EPA's regulatory programs have greatly improved the
environmental performance of U.S. industry over the past 30 years, limitations to this
process have become apparent. Traditional regulatory programs are often seen as
Page 3
-------
complex and costly, and may not apply to many areas of the service sector, such as
tourism and recreation industries addressed in this study.
The study was developed by the Sustainable Industries Partnership Program, a new
approach to environmental policy development that works outside the traditional
command-and-control regulatory process. The Program is based on the premise that
by studying an industry in close cooperation with its decision-makers, EPA can gain a
better understanding of the reasons why businesses embrace or resist actions to
protect the environment. Knowing why and how business decisions are made in an
industry sector can help EPA shape policies that offer incentives for exceptional
performance and overcome obstacles to success. The result is an agenda for
government, industry, and others -- leading to long-term environmental improvement
by businesses acting in their own self- interest. In the end, the Sustainable Industries
Partnership Program seeks to help industry sectors improve their environmental
performance while easing the costs and burdens of regulation.
The tourism and recreation sector is one of several industries that have been identified
as likely to benefit from a sector-based approach. To date, EPA has not examined
these industries in great depth and significant information gaps exist. This is due in
part to the size and complexity of the sector which is actually comprised of numerous
industries dispersed throughout the economy. Tourism and recreation can claim a
share of the economic outputs (and environmental impacts) of many industry sectors,
including, but not limited to, transportation, communications, power, wholesale and
retail trade, hospitality, agriculture, ranching, commercial fishing, manufacturing and
construction. While there are relevant databases from several industry trade
associations and government agencies, these sets of data have never been
consolidated to provide information for macro-level analysis of the sector.
Page 4
-------
Prior and Related Efforts
Industry, government and academic analysts have studied the tourism industry from
many different perspectives. Their efforts have focused primarily on assessing and
forecasting the economic,impacts of the tourism industry on specific geographic
areas. They have developed many models over the years that account for the direct
and indirect expenditures of tourists and recreationists in a region or nation.
More recently, analysts have begun to study the environmental impacts of tourism
and recreation industries. In this study we develop and use environmental indicators
to assess the impacts of selected leisure activities. The approach described in this
report, while unique, has built upon a number of the prior efforts described below.
A 1998 study by the German Federal Ministry of the, Environment, On the Way to
Sustainable Tourism: How Much Environment is Travel Going to Cost Us?,
examined the environmental impacts of many tourism and recreation industry supply
sectors. It also identified leisure-time activities such as skiing, boating and theme
parks that have significant environmental impacts. However, unlike EPA's approach
described here, it did not quantify outputs of these activities.
EPA's 1995 study, Indicators of the Environmental Impacts of Transportation,
developed national estimates of the magnitude of transportation's impacts on the
natural environment. This study compiled data on all primary modes of
transportation (highway, rail, aviation, and maritime transport) and all environmental
media (air, water and land resources), and covers the full "life-cycle" of
transportation. The report presents a useful framework for developing various
indicators of environmental performance for the transportation sector.
The World Tourism Organization (WTO) Environment Committee has developed
indicators for the tourism industry. The WTO's Indicators for the Sustainable
PageS
-------
Management of Tourism are designed for use in assessing the sustainability of a
nation's tourism industry or the sustainability of tourism at the local level. The
indicators cover those factors that are most relevant to tourism industry decision-
makers such as site stresses, infrastructure capacity, endangered species, use and
travel intensity, key resource consumption, tourist to resident ratios, and
environmental controls and planning procedures in place.
The U.S. Travel and Tourism Satellite Accounts (TTSA) provide a useful structure
for analyzing information on specific economic activities outside the structure of the
traditional accounting systems. The satellite accounting standards use the Standard
Industrial Classification of Tourist Activity (SICTA) to account for the numerous
sectors supplying the industry. In this study we used the SICTA to help identify and
define those tourism and recreation supply sectors that directly impact the economy
and environment and to quantify the expenditures of these sectors.
Page 6
-------
2. SCOPE OF STUDY: LEISURE ACTIVITIES
This study examines the environmental impacts of selected leisure activities in order
to improve our understanding of important and growing sectors of the U.S. economy.
It is not a guide for legislative or regulatory policies, but rather a framework for
analysis and exploration. Leisure activities is a broad term that includes outdoor and
indoor leisure activities carried out near home and away from home. For the purposes
of this study, leisure activities' participants include tourists, business travelers, and
local recreationists.
EPA considered several definitions of tourism and recreation when determining the
scope of this study. For example, the Travel Industry Association of America (TIA)
focuses exclusively on activities in which travel is involved, and defines a traveler as
a person who takes "a trip of 50 miles or more, one way, away from home or stayjs]
an overnight and returns."5 (TIA's Travel Scopeฎ) This travel-dependent definition is
useful in representing the importance of tourism for communities wishing to attract
outside economic resources, but it would lead to an underestimation of environmental
impacts associated with selected leisure activities by excluding local recreational
participants. As a result, this study examines both tourism and recreation activities
and their associated travel.
Throughout this report, EPA uses the word "trips" to refer to all trips regardless of distance
travelled including excursions of less than 50 miles each way.
Page 7
-------
The indicators were selected because they represent resource uses and environmental
impacts that can affect the natural environment. The indicators were calculated for
both tourists (who travel to participate in the activity) and local participants. For
tourists, the indicators include impacts resulting from the activity itself as well as the
services associated with travel (hotels, restaurants, retail, and transportation). Local
residents typically travel shorter distances and therefore generate fewer transportation
and no lodging impacts.
Despite some important distinctions between tourism and recreation, the
environmental impacts associated solely with an activity are the same regardless of
whether the activity participant is a tourist or a local resident. For example, a local
visitor to an amusement park will require the same amount of energy to use the rides,
consume the same amount of water, and generate the same amount of waste as a
tourist. For some activities, local visitors comprise the majority of participants.
Since the local participants also cause impacts, including them into the scope of this
report generates a more complete picture of the resource use and environmental
outputs of the selected leisure activities than if only tourists were considered.
The study considered ten leisure activities: skiing, fishing, hunting, boating, golfing,
casino gambling, amusement/theme parks, historic places and museums, conventions
and conferences, and waterside recreation (which includes any visits to freshwater or
the coast for the primary purpose of being near the water, e.g. for swimming but not
including fishing or boating). These activities were selected for this study because
data were available and because they were thought to have significant environmental
impacts based on the number of participants and the intensity of resource use and
pollutant outputs.
Selected indicators were developed to estimate outputs at a national level for each
activity. The outputs include water use, energy use, air pollutant emissions [carbon
Page 8
-------
monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and hydrocarbons (HC)], greenhouse gas
emissions, municipal waste generation, and waste water quality [Biological Oxygen
Demand (BOD) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS)], In addition, an economic
indicator was created to capture direct expenditures by activity participants.
It should be noted that only direct outputs and resource uses were included in this
study. Direct outputs result from the activity itself (e.g., water use for snowmaking)
and from the ancillary or supply sectors (e.g., water use in hotels). Indirect outputs,
such as the energy used to build the hotel, are not included.
Total vs. Net Impacts
The calculation of environmental impacts in this report represents total emissions or
total resource use rather than net emissions or resource use. While there are benefits
to an approach which considers net impacts, and quantifying net impacts would
provide a good context for the results of this study, there are two principal reasons
EPA chose to. concentrate on total impacts. First, estimates of total use are most
appropriate for establishing a benchmark because they allow us to revisit the
calculations over time to chart reductions or increases to resource use or other
environmental impacts. If the impacts were reported as net values, it would be more
difficult to make comparisons to the benchmark because the environmental impacts of
alternative activities, and perhaps the activities themselves, might change over time.
Second, estimates of total impacts facilitate regional or place-based analyses.
Because some environmental effects depend on the location in which they occur,
subtracting water use in one watershed (e.g., the location of home) from a water use
in a different watershed (e.g., the location of hotel) would give a misleading picture of
the resource use in the region of interest.
Net impacts could be determined by accounting for the fact people consume water
and energy, produce waste, and affect the environment when they are at home as well
Page 9
-------
as when they are participating in a tourism or recreational activity. In some cases,
their normal routine may even generate greater impacts. Net impacts could also be
determined by calculating resource use per dollar revenue in the tourism industry and
comparing that figure to resource use per dollar revenue in a different industry. In
mis manner, reporting net values would provide a context to help understand the
significance of tourism and recreation activity impacts.
Finally, this study was undertaken with the assumption that tourism and recreation
activities will continue to be pursued and will continue to contribute significantly to
the nation's economy and quality of life. Under this assumption, it is not necessary to
discuss alternatives to tourism and recreation activities; instead, it is important to set
the stage so that tourism and recreational activities can become more sustainable.
Page 10
-------
3. BENEFITS OF TOURISM AND RECREATION ACTIVITIES
Although this study focuses primarily on the environmental impacts of selected
leisure activities, it is important to consider the environmental impacts in relation to
the benefits of these activities. There has been considerable research on the economic
benefits of tourism-related activities; however, measures of economic activity may
understate the total social benefits of leisure activities. As described in the remainder
of this section, the benefits of tourism and recreation activities are realized by
individuals and communities. The environment can also benefit where leisure
activities support the preservation or restoration of natural ecosystems.
Individual Benefits
Research on the individual benefits of recreational activities typically assesses how
much people are paying or would be willing to pay for various recreational services.
Given that billions of dollars are spent on leisure activities in the U.S., and the fact
that studies often show that people would be willing to pay more than they actually do
for certain recreational services, one can deduce that the individual benefits of
recreational activities in the U.S. are enormous.
Personal enjoyment is the main reason that most people participate in recreational
activities. There are many other individual benefits that can be classified as either
Page 11
-------
physiological or psychological. Sortie of the physiological benefits of aerobic
recreational activities include: improved cardiovascular system, bones, muscle
strength, lung capacity and reductions in hypertension.
Some of the psychological benefits of leisure activities, according to the Academy of
Leisure Sciences, include: perceived sense of freedom, enhanced self-competence,
improved sense of worth, improved leadership skills, better ability to relate to others,
enhanced perceived quality of life, and increased learning about history, culture,
nature and cities. -.:...
Social Benefits
There is some indication that opportunities for recreation produce societal benefits
through, for example, reducing substance abuse, crime, and social ills (Academy of
Leisure Sciences). Individuals who are mentally and physically healthier tend to be
more productive at work and home, and are more likely to be beneficial members of
society.
Many recreational activities produce social benefits through education and exposure
to different people, ideas, and environments. Similarly, family bonds can be
strengthened when members spend leisure time together. Visiting cultural, historical,
and heritage sites, and participating in outdoor activities also promotes an enhanced
appreciation for and desire to preserve these sites and our natural environment.
Page 12
-------
Economic Benefits
Tourism and recreation make up a significant and growing portion of U.S. economic
activity. According to BEA's Travel and Tourism Satellite Account, the economic
effect of tourism (travel, tourism and business) in 1997 was between $393 billion and
$462 billion. This estimate significantly understates the economic effect of leisure
activities as a whole because it does not include recreation. An estimate of
recreational activities spending, also derived from BEA's Travel and Tourism
Satellite Accounts, is between $43 billion and $50 billion, bringing the total direct
economic value of leisure activities to between $436 billion and $512 billion.
To gain a more complete picture of the economic contribution of tourism and
recreation, one can use a multiplier to estimate the indirect effects of dollars spent on
tourism. For example, businesses that earn tourism dollars pay taxes, purchase
materials and hire employees. Using IMPLAN input-output model, EPA calculated a
multiplier of 2.77 for the tourism industry^. .
Using the multiplier, it is estimated that the total economic impact of tourism and
recreation in the U.S. is between $1.1 and $1.3 trillion dollars7 and total employment
is between 15.1 and 17.8 million jobs nation-wide.8 These data represent national
aggregates for all types of leisure activities, and thus will not be sufficient to
characterize specific types of activities in specific .areas. They are useful in larger
studies and perhaps for comparative purposes in studies that are limited in region or
type of activity.
6 Memo from Jared Creason, US EPA, dated December 7,2000.
7The $50 billion estimated as spending by participants in local recreation was not included the
calculation of indirect economic activities.
8Domestic tourism demand is calculated by subtracting travel by U.S. residents abroad and
international air fares from total tourism demand.
Page 13
-------
Environmental Benefits
Wetlands Restoration Program -
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
The Wetlands program automatically
transfers federal excise tax dollars on
certain motor fuel sales to priority states
with high rates of wetlands losses. The
program has resulted in surface water
quality improvements and fisheries
habitat restoration.
The same leisure activities that result in
environmental impacts can also benefit the
environment by preserving natural resources
or instilling an appreciation for the
environment. Although difficult to quantify,
such benefits are important to consider.
Tourism and recreational activities create ^_ป.ซซ..
economic incentives to protect the natural
and cultural environment. Tourism and recreation can also provide an alternative to
development scenarios that may have greater environmental impacts. Many
treasured natural and cultural sites are protected by federal, state, and local
governments for the public's leisure and recreational use. Other natural areas of the
U.S., which currently are without
government protection but are
supporting recreational uses,
alternatively could be supporting more
polluting or resource intensive
industries. While the environmental
impacts associated with large influxes
of people and the necessary supporting
infrastructure are important to
understand, they should be considered
along with the impacts of the potential
alternatives to gain a more complete
picture. For example, the air, water, waste, and noise pollution associated with a
mining operation may be greater than the impact of a resort located in the same place
Ski Industry Environmental Charter
The National Ski Areas Association (NSAA),
in conjunction with environmental groups and
government agencies, developed an
Environmental Charter in 2000. The charter
covers three topics: planning and design,
operations, and education and outreach. Within
these areas are principles for preventing,
reducing and measuring environmental
impacts. As of November 2000, roughly 160
ski areas, representing 70 percent of the
country's skiing visits, had endorsed the charter
and agreed to implement the principles.
Page 14
-------
Recreational Trails Program
Federal Highway Administration
The FHA collects $50-$ 150 million each
year from taxes on off-highway fuel use
in order to assist in constructing and
maintaining trails, and mitigate
environmental impacts associated with
recreational trail activities. The National
Scenic Byways Program provides
financial, technical, and marketing
assistance for corridors of special scenic,
recreational, cultural, and historic
significance. The program focuses on
developing and supporting corridor
management plans. The nearly 100
routes designated to date include a large
number of routes in environmentally
sensitive areas.
As a tourism attraction, certain ecosystems
and endangered species can create economic
value, and thereby help to ensure their
protection. For example, jobs and income
are created to support visitors wishing to
observe wildlife and habitat. Similarly, user
fees, taxes on recreation equipment, and
license fees for activities such as hunting and
fishing provide governments with resources
to manage natural resources.
West Virginia Whitewater
rafting head tax
A tax is collected from everyone who
participates in a commercial rafting trip.
The fee goes toward studying the
environmental impacts of rafting. In
addition, the rafting companies have
several river clean-up days.
Through exposure to natural and
cultural resources, many tourism and
recreational activities promote an
environmental appreciation among their
participants. This environmental ethic then gets put into practice through the work
and leisure activities of people. It has been observed that the rise of widespread
tourism in the U.S. in the 1950's and 1960's occurred at the same time as an increase
in the awareness of environmental concerns
among the American public. An informed
and concerned public is a powerful force
for protecting natural and cultural sites.
Recognizing this, businesses and
governments make efforts to educate
visitors to natural and cultural attractions.
Marine Sanitation Device Pump-Out
Program Grants (U.S. FWS)
This program provides grants to install
marine sanitation treatment devices for
low or no fee at marinas and refueling
stations. These additional devices allow
boaters to empty their tanks in some of
the places where the wait had been too
long or there had been a significant fee.
The program is paid for with federal
excise taxes on fishing gear or fuel, and
has increased compliance with sanitary
discharge regulations
Page 15
-------
For example, the National
Park Service educates visitors
on the characteristics of park
ecosystems, demonstrates the
manufacturing of recycled and
sustainable goods, and
provides information on the
resource use in park facilities.
Other benefits -
environmental, economic and
social - may stem from
Amelia Island Plantation
Florida
The Amelia Island Plantation established setbacks from
wetlands and dunes 10-20 years before such setbacks
became law throughout the state of Florida. Its developers
recognized that protecting the fragile ecosystem was an
investment and not a cost, and that this investment would
pay dividends in a quality of life not found at other
resorts. ATP has realized long-term benefits of set-asides,
setbacks and tree/vegetation protection. Property values
have increased and property owners are more satisfied
from an enhanced quality of life. Visitors to AIP
participating in passive recreation such as hiking,
canoeing/kayaking, fishing and bird watching in and
around the wetlands of Amelia Island Plantation
personally interact with the environment. That personal
interaction is the first step toward instilling a sense of
stewardship.
Sleeping Lady Conference Retreat, Leavenworth Washington
Conservation Methods at Sleeping Lady
Electrical energy is used at Sleeping Lady, except for propane used in the kitchen and solar
panels used to warm a small pool. Solar and wind power are not practical at this location, so
efforts are focused on conservation and waste reduction. The Heat Recovery System extracts
waste heat in the kitchen and laundry and transfers it to heat water efficiently and economically
while cooling and dehumidifying hot spots above the oven, dishwasher, and dryer. The Energy
Management System is computerized and allows an attendant to control heating for the whole
site. Unoccupied rooms are not heated. To conserve water and energy for laundry, bed linens
are changed every four days. Compact Fluorescent Lights are used extensively throughout the
site. Building Insulation is made from ground computer paper and cardboard boxes and blown
into the walls with a water-based, fire retardant binder that is non-toxic. Energy-Efficient
window panes are not made from old growth wood. There is an Air-To-Air Heat Exchanger that
exchanges warm indoor air with cold outdoor air while capturing and reusing some of the
indoor heat. Floors are mostly wood: either new maple or fir, or recycled fir flooring. The
bathroom floors are made of a composition of linseed and plant fibers. Decking around the
buildings is made from plastic grocery bags and hardwood chips. Native Plants, except
vegetables and fruits, have been used for all landscaping. Kitchen Waste is all used on site. All
organic waste is composted.
tourism and recreation industries. Future work could seek to quantify these benefits
to provide a more complete picture of the impacts of leisure activities.
Page 16
-------
4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Tourism and recreation are inherently linked to the well-being of the natural
environment. Loss of the attributes that make a site or region attractive to tourists and
recreationists can economically compromise the tourism and recreation industries in
that region and detract from the livelihoods of people who depend upon them.
Businesses that supply tourism and recreation goods and services, governments at all
levels, and the tourists and recreationists themselves share a stake in ensuring the
long-term sustainability of recreation and tourism resources.
Sustainable development has been defined as "development which meets the
requirements of the present generation without endangering the requirements of future
generations." The Environment Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 helped elevate the
concept of sustainable development to a global priority. As discussed in a recent
report published by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation,
sustainability, with respect to tourism development, means:
ensuring environmental quality, so that even when tourism grows in volume,
the stress on soil, water, air/climate and site coverage decreases;
preservation of biological diversity and responsible management of the
specific uniqueness and beauty of nature and landscape, for nature and
landscape are a non-increaseable and non-replenishable resource;
Page 17
-------
decrease of resource consumption and increase of efficiency in using natural
and cultural resources, so that tourism can remain profitable and economically
healthy in the long run.
With improved information and careful management and planning, tourism and
recreation activities can provide economic benefits to communities in ways that do
not degrade the environment. Sustainable tourism and recreation industries can be
seen as protectors of the environment by discouraging less sustainable industries.
Sound management can increase the number of tourists and recreationists that can
sustainably use a site. Likewise, neglect and mismanagement can result in
unsustainable impacts from a relatively small number of people.
Visitors inevitably increase consumption of resources and energy and waste
production at a site. The effect of this on the health of the ecosystem will depend on
the intensity of use, other pre-existing or concurrent problems (e.g., acid rain or
climate change), the ecosystem's carrying capacity (its ability to withstand impacts),
and the community's infrastructure capacity. Environmental impacts are not confined
to the site of the activity. For example, some of the largest impacts of tourism on the
environment arise from individuals traveling to the tourism destination. Other
suppliers of goods and services to tourists and recreationists may impact other
ecosystems and may contribute to the overall depletion of natural resources.
Tourism and recreation development in many cases may be environmentally
preferable to alternative types of development. Many rural communities benefit from
preserving their natural resources for recreational purposes, attracting new visitors
and residents, new businesses and economic growth in a manner that is more
sustainable than the alternative extractive industries. Some urban areas have
undertaken efforts to promote tourism in place of the more traditional heavy industrial
activities commonly located near urban areas. In addition to economic benefits, these
communities have benefitted economically from cleaner air and water, more open
Page 18
-------
spaces, and more recreational and cultural opportunities. Similarly, some types of
tourism and recreation can be more sustainable than others. Ecotourism is being
promoted by many communities as a sustainable alternative to more intensive tourism
and recreation such as large scale resort development.
The environmental impacts of tourism and recreation activities vary significantly
among subsectors of the industry. In some cases, the recreation activity itself will be
a major component of sector environmental impacts (e.g., off-road driving). In other
cases, the activity itself has little environmental effects (e.g., bird watching) and the
major impacts result almost entirely from travel to the destination and other
associated activities. In addition, the potential for environmental impacts for a given
activity will vary depending on the vulnerability of the affected environment.
Environmental Indicators
In recent years there has been considerable interest and concern about the combined
economic, social and environmental sustainability of development. Industry and
governments are increasingly looking to integrate environmental concerns into
economic decisions and vice versa. To do so requires a means of measuring and
monitoring environmental impacts. Given that the tourism and recreation industry's
economic well-being and environmental quality generally enjoy a mutually
supportive or symbiotic relationship, stakeholders in this industry have been leaders
in developing methods for quantifying environmental impacts.
The types of environmental impacts vary considerably depending on the specific
activity. In addition, while some environmental impacts are tangible (e.g.,
concentration of pollutants in the air), many are less tangible and more difficult to
quantify (e.g., strain on an ecosystem). These complications make it a challenge to
measure environmental impacts.
Page 19
-------
Environmental indicators can be used as an effective way to quantify, monitor and
^
communicate environmental impacts. An indicator is "a measure that provides a clue
to a matter of larger significance or makes perceptible a trend or phenomenon that is
not immediately detectable" (World Resources Institute, 1995). Indicators are used
extensively to track trends and guide decision-making processes in many fields.
Examples of common economic and social indicators include the Gross Domestic
Product and literacy rate, respectively. Indicators quantify and simplify information
on complex phenomena so that it is more readily analyzed and communicated.
Indicators of environmental performance or sustainability are gaining widespread use.
The World Resources Institute, the Organization of Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), the U.S. Interagency Working Group on Sustainable
Development, the President's Council on Sustainable Development, and the United
Nations Commission on Sustainable Development are just a few of the organizations
that have recently been involved with developing environmental sustainability
indicators. The Environmental Committee of the World Tourism Organization has
developed a set of environmental indicators specifically for the tourism sector. Most
environmental and socio-economic indicators of sustainable development can be
distilled into four categories: 1) resource depletion; 2) pollution; 3) ecosystem risk;
and 4) impact on human welfare.
This existing work on environmental indicators provides a useful slate of measures to
consider in developing this model of environmental indicators for tourism and
recreation.
Page 20
-------
5. AN ACTIVITY-BASED METHODOLOGY
EPA's model generates economic and environmental indicators specific to subsectors
of the tourism and recreation industries. These indicators, alone and in combination
with other subsector-specific data such as participation rates, and person-days of
participation, provide measures to chart progress toward more sustainable tourism and
recreation.
Tourism and Recreation Subsectors
Subsectors are defined by leisure activity. The activities or subsectors included in this
study are: skiing and snowboarding, fishing, hunting, boating, golf, casino gambling,
amusement/theme parks, historic places and museums, conventions and conferences,
and waterside recreation (which include any visits to freshwater or the coast for the
primary purpose of being near the water and not including fishing or boating). These
activities were chosen because they may have significant economic or environmental
impacts and because there are reliable data on participation, related businesses and
facilities, economic expenditures and associated resource use of the activities
themselves. These subsectors could be augmented with other subsectors of interest
Page 21
-------
such as: all terrain vehicle (ATV) use, snowmobiling, cruises, arena/stadium events,
camping/hiking, and many more.
Environmental Indicators Model
Tourism/Recreation
Subsectors*
(^Retail ^) ActlV!*y (^Restaurants^) (Transportation)
T
Environmental and
Economic Impacts
Expenditures Greenhouse Air Water Solid Energy Waste- Activity Other Environmental and
Gases Pollution Use Waste Water Specific Economic Indicators
* Examples include: Skiing, Fishing, Hunting, Boating, Golf, etc.
-------
Only the direct economic and environmental impacts are calculated in the model.
That is, the model includes those supply sectors that deal directly with tourists and
recreationists. Direct businesses and services include hotels, restaurants, and airlines,
while indirect businesses and services might include laundry services, equipment
manufacturers, travel publications, restaurant suppliers, real estate developers, and
banks. For example, indicators of the environmental and economic impacts of airline
travel are assessed using this model, but indicators of impacts associated with
manufacturing the aircraft are not. Indirect environmental impacts, while potentially
important contributors to an industry's overall impacts, are often more difficult to
quantify and attribute to a specific industry.
This model differs from earlier models of tourism and recreation. Most are designed
to measure and forecast the economic impacts of tourism as a whole, either at a
national or regional level, or to assess site-specific impacts of individual tourism and
recreation activities. These models do not examine environmental impacts on a
national scale for specific activities.
This model captures the diversity of the tourism and recreation sector, allowing a
better understanding of its many segments. A more aggregated approach would place
attention either on a few large sources of environmental impacts that are common to
all tourism (e.g., transportation) but miss individual subsectors' unique economic and
environmental impacts, as well as factors that influence environmental protection
decisions in particular segments of these industries.
Economic and Environmental Indicators
In its current state, the model uses a single economic indicator of expenditures on
tourism and recreation. The model uses nine environmental indicators: water use,
wastewater [Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS)],
energy use, air pollutant emissions [carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx),
Page 23
-------
and hydrocarbons (HC)], greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 equivalents), and municipal
solid waste generation. The indicators presently included in the model were selected
for two primary reasons: 1) data for each are frequently collected by both government
and industry, and 2) they can be quantified for each subsector (i.e., they are not
subsector specific) allowing for comparisons between subsectors. Any indicator that
fits these criteria could be added to the model. Other economic indicators that could
expand the model include employment, wages, and tax revenues. Future expansion of
environmental indicators could include renewable energy use, other toxic and criteria
air emissions, waste recycling, and toxic wastewater pollutants.
The indicators focus on the total impacts of subsectors, rather than on the net impacts
of participants. Total impacts are relevant for communities, policymakers, and
tourism managers who seek to identify and mitigate impacts on particular tourism and
recreation sites or regions. For groups interested in net impacts, such as communities
weighing tourism and recreation against a different economic development scenario,
or tourism and recreation participants who are concerned about their impacts relative
to their everyday impacts at home, it would be necessary to calculate the indicators
for the alternate activity and subtract those values from the ones reported in this
document.
Brief discussions of each indicator, the industry supply sectors that are currently
accounted for in the model, and how these indicators actually relate to environment
and human health concerns are provided below. Appendix A provides a detailed
description of the inputs used for specific subsectors and the data limitations.
Water use: The water use indicator in this model accounts for gallons of
water used in lodging, restaurants, retail, and the recreational activities. Fresh
water is essential for household, agriculture, industrial and commercial
purposes. It is also a critical habitat for many plant and animal species. Water
taken from an ecosystem for human use can temporarily or permanently affect
Page 24
-------
the recharging needs of wet and wetland habitats and the essential physical
functions of the water cycle, such as the cleansing action of flood waters.
Wastewater pollutants: Wastewater pollutant indicatqrs in this model were
developed for lodging, restaurants, retail and specific1 sectors (where data were
available,). Two measures of water pollution are included: Biological Oxygen
Demand (BOD) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS). BOD is an indication of
the amount of organic matter in water that is released to the environment.
Because microbes consume oxygen when they break down organic matter,
less oxygen is available in polluted water for fish and other aquatic life. At
very IQW oxygen concentrations, advanced aquatic life ceases. Total
Suspended Solids (TSS) impact an aquatic environment in several ways.
They reduce light penetration, which affects algae and plants that depend on
photosynthesis. Solids can clog fish gills, which either ki]ls the fish or
reduces their growth rate. When solids settle out, they cover the bottom of the
waterbody and can bury eggs and degrade the habitat of bottom-dwelling
organisms.
Energy use: The energy use indicator is measured in British Thermal Units
(Btus) and accounts for electricity and fuel use associated with lodging,
restaurants, retail, transportation, and recreational activities. Fuql use comes
not only from transportation, but also from furnaces and boilers used in hotels,
restaurants, and retail for heating and cooking. Units of fuel and electricity
consumption are translated into Btu's for comparison purposes. Btu values
are not calculated to account for secondary fuel use, that is, fuel use at electric
power generation plants.
Air pollutant emissions: Air emission indicators in the model account for
direct air emissions from transportation, restaurants, retail and recreational
activities. These values do not include the generation of electricity as a source.
Page 25
-------
The air emissions indicators include carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides
(NOX), and hydrocarbons (HC). These indicator pollutants have the potential
for direct impacts on human health, vegetation and materials damage. Carbon
monoxide is a poisonous inhalant that deprives the body tissues of necessary
oxygen. Nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons can have adverse effects on
humans when inhaled above certain concentrations. Environmental impacts
also arise when these pollutants are present together in the atmosphere, where
they react in the presence of sunlight to form photochemical smog, or ozone.
Photochemical smog is damaging to plants, reduces visibility, can be
detrimental to human health, and can degrade the overall experience of leisure
activity participants.
Greenhouse gas emissions: Greenhouse gas emissions are calculated for
lodging, restaurants, retail, transportation, and recreational activities.
Emissions from these categories are primarily due to the combustion of fossil
fuels and include emissions from electric power generation.9 The major
greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide
(N2O). Emissions of these three gases are converted to a single measure
through established factors, and are reported in this report as CO2 equivalents.
Though greenhouse gas emissions are generated during fossil fuel combustion
like other air pollutants such as CO, NOx, and HC, they are presented
separately because the type and scale of their effects are quite different.
Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere, so that an overabundance of
these gases increases temperatures worldwide. This temperature increase in
turn causes shifts in climate patterns that lead to droughts, floods, eroded
agricultural soil, and disrupted ecological habitats. Also, due to the increased
temperature of oceans and the melting of polar icecaps, sea levels rise.
9Unlike the indicators that include only direct impacts, the greenhouse gas indicator captures
the impacts associated with electric power generation which is otherwise considered an indirect
impact.
Page 26
-------
Municipal solid waste generation: The waste generation indicator takes into
account tons of municipal waste generation associated with travel, lodging,
restaurants, retail facilities and specific recreational activities. The effects of
municipal wastes on the environment are varied. First, municipal wastes are
comprised of wasted raw materials and natural resources. Improperly
managed municipal wastes in the environment can spread infectious disease
and be toxic to human health and the environment. The management of
municipal wastes can also have adverse impacts on the environment. The
collection, processing, and recycling of wastes are all energy intensive and
costly. Landfilling and incineration both result in residual releases to the
environment.
Model Inputs and Outputs
The model requires various activity-specific trip data and activity-specific
environmental data as inputs. The trip-related data inputs (e.g., annual number of
participants, trips of any length or duration, miles, days, overnights, and expenditures)
are primarily obtained from industry surveys specific to each activity subsector. Such
survey data may not be in the exact form required by the model or may not
encompass all of the required information. Therefore, the actual model inputs are
often derived from two or more separate sources, and occasionally from assumptions
based on travel and expenditure patterns in the U.S. Activity-specific environmental
data are obtained from a variety of sources, including industry surveys (e.g., water
used by golf courses), engineering texts (e.g., typical water usage in waterside
recreational areas), and government studies (e.g., electric power usage by conference
and convention centers).
In addition to the sector-specific input data, there is also a significant amount of
environmental indicator data not specific to the activity subsectors embedded within
the model. Examples include: average water and electric power use per hotel guest,
Page 27
-------
air emissions per mile of automobile travel, and average waste generation per
restaurant meal. These data are constants and are the same for all subsectors.
The model uses the input data to identify the relationships between tourism and
recreation activities and sustainable development. Theoretically, the model can
output hundreds of different combinations of the input data. However, only a portion
of these combinations are useful in gaining a better understanding of sustainability
issues. A comprehensive list of the model input requirements and output measures
are summarized in the tables below. The indicators measure either emissions or
resource use. In order to understand the sustainability issues surrounding these
results, one must consider the effect of the activities on a specific ecosystem or
community. There is substantial variability in the capacity of ecosystems to
withstand environmental stresses such as the withdraw of freshwater or increased air
pollutant emissions. Linking these stresses to actual environmental effects requires
additional data and analysis at a local level. This would be a valuable next step for
readers who wish to understand the sustainability of leisure activities.
Page 28
-------
Tourism and Recreation Model Environmental Inputs
Water use
BOD
TSS
Electric energy
use
CO
NOX
HC
CO2
equivalents
CH4
N2O
Waste
Generation
Lodging
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Restaurant
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Retail
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Transporta-
tion
X
X
X
X
X
X
Activity-
Specific
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X)
(X): When applicable
BOD: Biological Oxygen Demand, TSS: Total Suspended Solids, CO: carbon monoxide, NOX: nitrogen oxides,
HC: hydrocarbons, CO2: carbon dioxide, CH4: methane, N2O: nitrous oxide
Page 29
-------
Tourism and Recreation Model Subsector Inputs
General
Lodging-related
Restaurant-related
Retail-related
Travel-related
Activity-specific
environmental inputs
number of participants
number of trips
number of person-days
number of overnight stays
number of lodging days
number of checkout days
lodging expenditures
number of meals
restaurant expenditures
retail expenditures
person miles - auto
person miles air
water use
wastewater generation
electric energy
air emissions
greenhouse gas emissions
waste generation
Page 30
-------
}
S
a
&>
3
f
!
taurants
1
00
.5
2
ฐM
H
pS
CS
^P
o ฃH
1
|
11
(d
.g
<3 -2
'S
PH
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Water Use
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
BOD Generation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
I TSS Generation
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Electricity Use
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CO Emissions
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
NOX Emissions
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
HC Emissions
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1 Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
c
Waste Generatio:
X
X
I Miles Traveled
X
X
Lodging Days
X
X
X
|| Expenditures
CO
2
|
W
w*
3
X
o
S
f
e
rs
o
rn
1
|
O
8
1
i
ง
S1
2
c/5
o
i/j
1
c
O
"3
_o
_o
o
2
Q
Page 31
-------
Industry-Wide Outputs
Water Use
Wastewater BOD Generation
Wastewater TSS Generation
Energy Use
CO Emissions to Air
NOx Emissions to Air
HC Emissions to Air
Greenhouse Gas Emissions to Air
Municipal Waste Generation
BOD: Biological Oxygen Demand
TSS: Total Suspended Solids
CO: carbon monoxide
NOX: nitrogen oxides
HC: hydrocarbons
Calculation Methods
There are two methods used to calculate the indicators, depending on the available
data. Appendix A provides more detail on the two methods. Most indicators for the
different recreation activities and sectors were determined by a calculation of the
form:
P*R = E
c
Where P represents the participation (e.g., visitors, hotel nights, etc.), R is an
emissions factor that has been converted to quantity per unit of participation, and E
represents the total value of the indicator for the particular subsector (e.g., annual
NOx emissions by the boating subsector).
Page 32
-------
For a limited number of activity/sector combinations, the indicators were estimated
with an alternative method:
X*M =
Where X represents expenditures in an activity and M is an emissions factor
expressed in terms of quantity per dollar spent on the activity, indicators calculated
with this method include those for fishing, hunting, boating, and conferences and
conventions, as well as indicators associated with the retail supply sector.
Limitations
When interpreting the outputs of this model, it is important to keep in mind the
objectives of the modeling approach and its limitations. This methodology may be
used to compare environmental performance among activity-based subsectofs of the
industry. Such comparisons can be used to identify and prioritize individual
subsectors (e.g., skiing, golf) or certain aspects of subsectors (e.g., travel, lodging, of
the recreational activities themselves) that could be the focus of initiatives to improve
environmental performance. This study also provides a baseline measure of
environmental performance of some of the industry's subsectors. Trends over tirne
can then be tracked against this baseline.
The indicator values are estimated from a number of data sources. The quality of
these sources can vary widely. Occasionally data are not available or are incomplete^
requiring that certain effects be left out or estimated. In some cases, environmental
indicator data from a single recreational facility is extrapolated to the entire activity
subsector in the U.S. Furthermore, all possible contributors to an economic or
environmental indicator may not be considered.
Page 33
-------
Initial efforts have been focused on obtaining and incorporating the largest
contributors to a resource consumption or waste issue, occasionally at the expense of,
relatively small contributors. For example, in quantifying water use by the golfing
subsector, considerable efforts were made to establish accurate values for irrigation
water use, which is a relatively large source of water use for this subsector. Water use
for sanitary purposes was not factored into the indicator because of the lack of
available data. Including these data in future water use estimates for golf courses will
provide a more complete picture of golf course water use.
The participation rates for each activity may be underestimated as well; all of the
surveys, except that used for the Amusement/Theme Park subsector, were based on
telephone or mail surveys of American households. As a result, the participation rates
reported for most subsectors do not include international travelers to the U.S. It is
estimated, however, that only 4% of trips in the U.S. greater than 100 miles are due to
international travelers; but at the same time trips over 100 miles only make up a
portion of the participants we are studying. Given the overall degree .of accuracy of
this study in its current form, this omission is not expected to be a significant
limitation. s
In addition, simplifications were made for some subsectors and producer industries.
For example, the role of second homes and families' and friends' homes were not
considered. Instead, travelers to second homes were considered, for the purposes of
the indicators, to stay in hotels or motels. This simplification overestimates lodging
expenditures and may affect other indicators. Second homes also may have impacts
in areas not considered in this study, including land use and property tax revenues.
It is important to note also that, at this stage, not all of the environmental indicators
are considered for all of the supply sectors. While water use, electric energy use and
waste generation are estimated for the lodging, restaurant and retail supply sectors
and for the activities themselves, they are not yet estimated for the transportation
Page 34
-------
supply sector. As noted earlier, the indicators only address the direct impacts of each
activity. The impacts of related infrastructure and development, such as new housing
and roads that often come hand-in-hand with tourism and recreation attractions, are
not examined.
Another important limitation of this study is that it addresses environmental impacts
on a national level. The indicators provide a broad perspective and do not distinguish
variations in season or actual environmental stress that depend on the location of the
activity. For example, air emissions of NOx from cars and airplanes are treated
equally, despite the fact that NOx emitted from aircraft above 10,000 feet may have
up to 50 times the greenhouse gas effect of NOx emitted closer to the ground.
Similarly, water use for snowmaking in the mountains is treated the same in this
model as water use for golf courses in the desert. The environmental stress from
water consumption is likely to differ in each of these situations. The model also does
not distinguish between total water use, some of which returns to the source following
snowmaking or irrigation, and consumptive water use.
Finally, when interpreting the model results, it is important to understand that there
may be some overlap between the economic and environmental indicator values
attributed to each subsector. Efforts were made to minimize overlap between activity
subsectors, but tourists and recreationists often participate in multiple activities and
occasionally it is difficult to say where one activity ends and another begins. An
example is the potential overlap between the fishing and boating activity subsectors.
The data assembled on the boating subsector were in part collected from a survey of
individuals who stated that their primary trip activity had been boating. Nevertheless,
a portion of their time may have been spent fishing. Therefore the model may be
attributing some fishing travel and visiting impacts to the boating subsector. The data
assembled on the fishing subsector covered individuals whose primary trip activity
had been fishing. Again, a portion of the impacts that can be associated with boating
may have been attributed to the fishing activity subsector.
Page 35
-------
Directions for Future Work
The model described in this report is a work in progress. It offers a flexible,
analytical tool to better understand the environmental impacts of leisure activities.
The model was designed to grow as additional data become available and as new
applications for it arise. With additional research to refine input data, any activity
subsector can be examined in greater detail. The model also could be configured for
interactive access through additional formats, such as the World Wide Web.
In addition to continually improving the existing subsector specific data inputs, we
have identified a number of promising areas for future work.
Incorporate additional subsectors.
The ten activities presently included comprise a large portion of the tourism and
recreation industry's economic and environmental impacts. Still other activities
potentially having significant impacts are not yet included. We designed the model to
make it possible to add new subsectors. Additional activity subsectors that could be
included are: snowmobiling, all terrain vehicle (ATV) use, recreational vehicle (RV)
use, hiking and camping, and cruises.
Incorporate additional economic and environmental indicators.
Currently the model provides a set of important indicators for examining and
comparing the economic and environmental impacts of selected leisure activities.
Additional indicators, both economic and environmental, could make the model a
more useful tool. Key economic indicators for consideration include employment and
tax revenues. Suggested additional environmental indicators include water use in arid
regions versus water use in temperate regions, toxic pollutants in wastewater
discharges, air toxics, and species endangerment. In addition, since tourism, travel,
and recreation activities can have positive environmental effects, indicators such as
habitat preservation and watershed protection may also be added.
Page 36
-------
Incorporate indirect economic and environmental impacts.
The model looks only at direct economic and environmental impacts. Indirect
impacts are those associated with products and services that are not provided directly
to tourism and recreation participation. For example, air pollutant emissions
associated with the generation of electricity used by tourism and recreation businesses
are not currently considered in the model. Nor is the economic impact associated
with expenditures on this electricity included. Such indirect impacts, while likely to
be significant, were beyond the scope of the study, which is limited to those economic
and environmental impacts that are directly affected by industries in the tourism and
recreation subsectors. Furthermore, a more advanced model and additional data
would be required to capture the indirect effects. ' : '
Incorporate time trends for forecasting.
Addition of time trends to the model would allow its use as a forecasting tool. The
economic impacts, environmental impacts, and resource use associated with each
subsector may change over time. Activity participation rates and the number and
distribution of facilities also vary with time. Tourism and recreation activities that
have relatively little impact today could have significant impacts in the future, and
other activities could decline in importance. The model could be expanded to include
trends data as inputs and then output measures could be estimated for future dates.
Net effects. ,
The calculation of net effects would provide a context to understand the
environmental impacts of leisure activities relative to other activities (e.g., going to
work, gardening) or industry sectors such as agriculture, mining or manufacturing.
However, accounting for all of the different variables that would determine the
positive or negative net effect of engaging in these leisure activities (versus staying at
home and commuting to work) would be difficult. Future work on this would require
additional collection of more recent data, then analysis to account for the "substitute
effects" generated by participating in leisure activities.
Page 37
-------
6. RESULTS
This section demonstrates the application of the model by presenting comparisons of
selected indicators and measures across activity subsectors. Results for the skiing,
fishing, hunting, boating, golf, casino gaming, amusement/theme parks,
historic/cultural attractions, conventions and conferences, and waterside recreation
subsectors are presented in Tables 1 and 2, and Figures 1 through 17 below.
As discussed in the previous section there are several limitations which should be
kept in mind when reviewing the results of this study. The reader should refer to that
discussion to assist with appropriate interpretation of the results.
Table 1 presents for each of the ten activity subsectors a few key data inputs that often
have an important influence on the resulting environmental indicators for the
subsectors. These key inputs include: number of participants, expenditures, lodging
days, travel miles by mode of travel, and activity-specific indicators. Table 2 presents
some of the key indicator outputs for each activity subsector. Key outputs include
water use, wastewater, energy use, municipal waste, air emissions, and greenhouse
gases.
For each environmental indicator the results are presented such that comparisons can
be made among the activity subsectors. One graph for each indicator presents the
Page 38
-------
total consumption/generation for each subsector. A separate graph indicates the same
quantities per 1,000 dollars of expenditures, per trip, and per participant. A few
observations for each environmental indicator are presented below.
Water use
Because hotels and motels use large quantities of water, the total water used by an
activity subsector will primarily be a factor of days of overnight lodging associated
with the subsector. The exception is when there is significant water use associated
with the recreational activity. The conferences and conventions subsector illustrates
the influence of lodging days on water use. Table 1 shows that there is a relatively
large number of lodging days and few trips associated with conference and
convention participants compared to the other sectors studied. This results in very
high water use per participant and trip as seen in Figure 2.
Other subsectors, such as museums and historical places, and waterside activities
have a relatively high total water use due to then- relatively high number of lodging
days and participation rates. However, when presented as a ratio of expenditures,
trips, or participants as in Figure 2, the values are similar to the other sectors.
Waterside recreation has a high water use by expenditure due to the relatively low
total expenditures for this activity.
Wastewater
BOD and TSS generation differ somewhat in their primary sources. For most
subsectors, restaurants are the source for the majority of BOD. This is because of the
high concentration of fats, oils and grease that are released to wastewater during
cooking and clean-up. With regard to TSS, however, most can be attributed to hotels.
This may be because of the high water consumption at hotels. The results indicate
that among the subsectors on a per-participant and per-dollar expenditure basis,
waterside had the highest BOD and TSS release rates. Conventions had the highest
Page 39
-------
BOD and TSS release rates on a per-trip basis because of the higher percentage of
partipipants who stay in hotels.
Energy Use
Total energy use for each subsector is primarily a factor of overall participation and
lodging days. Two of the subsectors that consume the most energy are waterside
activities and museums and historical plages (Figure 8). Because Figure 9 shows that
the energy use is about average by trip and participant for these two subsectors, we
can conclude that the high participation rates are driving the large total energy,use.
Another energy-intensive sector is conferences and conventions; this is primarily due
to the large portion of participants using hotel lodging. Figure 10 indicates that
waterside activities are the largest consumer of energy for transportation, which iง
driven by the high participation rate.
Air Emissions
Air emissions in the tourism and recreation industry are primarily driven by distances
traveled by automobile to the aptivity site and by the activities themselves. For the
su.bsectors studied, the boating and waterside recreation subsectors account fpr muph
of the air emissions. In the case of boating, the higher emissions can be attributed to
the use of boat and jet ski engines, which tend to have significantly lower efficienpies
and emission controls than automobile engines, resulting in high HC, CQ, and NQx
emissions. The relatively high air emissions for waterside recreation can be attributed
to the large distances traveled by the many participants and frequent trips in this
subsector.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Greenhouse gas emissions are dependent on transportation and, to a lesser extent,
lodging. Transportation accounts for between 40 and 90 percent of greenhouse gas
r Page 40
-------
emissions. Emissions per participant are highest for waterside activities, because of
the high number of trips per person. Per trip emissions are highest for convention
participants because many of these trips involve long-distance flights.
Municipal Solid Waste Generation
Municipal solid waste generation is primarily dependent on the number of restaurant
meals. Figure 11 shows that of the subsectors studied, the waterside activity
subsector generates by far the largest quantities of municipal solid waste. An
examination of Figure 12 also shows a relatively high rate of waste generation per
participant. Table 1 shows that the subsector also accounts for the largest number of
meals and that activity-specific waste generation has been attributed to the subsector.
In addition, waterside recreation is associated with frequent overnight trips resulting
in a relatively high number of lodging checkout days. Estimates for waste generation
during checkout days are considerably higher than normal lodging days. (Rhyner,
Shwartz et. al., 1995) All of these factors contribute to the large waste generation rate
for the waterside recreation.
Page 41
-------
s
I
Cfl
s
CO
-b
I
1
S
I
s
o
5?
3
8"
8
g
g
vo"
i
II
IS
I
งI
3
fS
I
fe
I
|
f
S
w CQ
41
-------
4)
09
i
SI
O
I
a J
I I
i 1 3
o" o
V5 00
g-ซ--
a "" - a"
s
IS
88 8 '
SO ' O
oo S
>o t*
I
8S 3
g s I I
-------
(U
g
1
0>
CA
s
CO
I
O
u C
1.1
11
l
1
ฃ K
I
8 S a 2
t~ CM H *o
in
" ' "
IPil
s
2 g Sf
งง!
R" S i
ป" f a"
S 2
338
S S'S.
Q O O g Q
of -- " 50 o-
ง -
Is2 ' li
IP'
S S '
S 2 '
Sซซ VO ' O O
_ >d e! g g
^- ป
a
3 2 '
is ft
8 a '
St-- ซ '
5 (M
.s 5,
v ซ 5
3S'a
ฐ - - o 8 S
""
8
. n.
|
is ฃ
il ง
^ _
"S .1
S 8
g s ' '
2 ' g |
~" oC t-"
'II
O O *
-. ts o
I 8 g
- . -i
2 g g
M rt
s *
m
111 ง
I < >S H
8 g,
ป
T3
8
" a
11
I 1
ง ฐ
-
a 3
Q 8
-------
2
I
V
I
W
I
TJ
If
*Z Q.
03
5 c
Jr .-^ = ro -i=
O > 03 -K O>
* 'ง I 0 E
o> ^ a: iฑ 5
^ E3 D 1! 0
I
I
I
O)
o
8
o"
o
o
o
%,
\
\
\.
\
V-
\
1
I
I
o
o
suo||B9
-------
CD 0)
tn co
us
I5
CD
o
g
CD
O
O
O
If)
O
g
co"
o
CM"
O)
2
W
o
o
CO
i
o
in
nj
8
0)
1
O)
c
8
I
.22
T3
\0
M-
51
t
Q.
I
jojoasqns XJIAIPV
-------
2
i
i?
s= CO -^,
to -ti DI
c < o:
.2 B D
0
O
O
O
ffl
1
CO
I
O)
CM
oo
o
o
o
CD"
o
o
o
o
of
^o
\
X
v
%
**
%
\
\
y
1
I
0)
Q
O
1
o
a
Q
o
CD
pa}ejauao QO9 jo suoi
-------
Q
o
If)
o
o
*
d
Q
O
GO
i
I
ro
ฃ
I I
O Q)
Q E*
S t
fe>
jojoasqns
-------
o
(A
JQ
3
CO
I
o
f i
* ง
O Q.
(O CO
2
ฃ fill
~__ "S
-------
2!
I
0)
CO
.a
3
CO
.ฃ
I
5 g
3 1
O =5
_a> e
CO ,fi"
a
o
2
Q)
0)
O
CO O
0)
2
0)
CD
I
O)
r- "c ro
ง? t S;
CO CO CO
CO CO CO
CD CD CD
o> o> o:
222
CD CD CD
333
oo
T
c>
CD
O
CM
T-f
C)
r
-------
2
I
0)
to
J3
CO
I
T5
I
.2
o>
(0
a
o
*=
2
o
0)
O
(0
(0
n
O
O
CO
1
O>
iZ
CO
CO
Q
o
o
o
CM"
o
o"
.
00
2
o>
i
(0
(O
o
o
o
I
o
c
(0
CSI
8
9 ซ
SP
sjopasqns
-------
s
I
0)
(0
.Q
3
(0
I
O o
%%
I* 1,
stall
^ "S o> >
s>
0)
UJ
I
oo
ง
CD
LE
H A
E R
^ R
El Lod
V ,W >A
X
<5i
o
.
=
\
\
s>
I
\
&+
-------
CO
o
co"
o
o
o
o
o
o
CM"
!
o
o
g
u
re
o>
en
ซ
o
in
c
(0
o
CO
.1
ฃ2
I
O)
c;
TD
JS
(0
T3
"S
CD
o
o
in
jopasqng
-------
I
O)
\
#
^
\
V
%
.
1
I
s
\
o
ง
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o"
ma
-------
0)
I
w
I
K
s>
I
suoi
-------
I
1
V
I
'E
S
ra
g
Q.
O)
C
T3
8
i
CO
CO
JB
s
CO
Q.
I
-------
8
o
o
oo
o
o
o
8
CO
o
o
o
o"
o
in
O
o I
8 -8
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o"
o
o
e
o
-------
ฐ0
I
1
I
(0
O
O
O
sjopesqng AJIAIJOV
-------
M
O
*
tn
sjopesqns
-------
S2
3
o
o
to
JQ
3
(O
a
I
.2
o>
5
W
O
o
=ง!
s a*
nS ป
c ฑia:
DBDQB
I
cr
in
s
o
15
CO
I
to>
iE
I
x
g
03
O
'ฃj
O
o
sjojoesqns
-------
2
I
V
V)
A
3
CO
1
o
I
in
o
'55
.ฃ2
ill
o
a
(0
o
I
O
a>
O)
2
I
O)
Q.
'^
CO
g
'
111
ง
0
O)
I
'o
'
g
LU
ง
I
I
I
a>
b
I
TO
O
ง
jopesqns
-------
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Hotel & Motel Association. 1997 Economic Impact Report on the Travel &
Tourism Industry. 1998.
American Hotel & Motel Association. The 1997 Lodging Industry Profile. 1998.
Balaton Group and the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and Environmental
Protection. Indicators and Information Systems for Sustainable Development.
1996.
Bond, Richard. CRC Handbook of Environmental Control. Cleveland: CRC Press,
1975.
California Department of Boating and Waterways. Documented Field Study of Actual
Electrical Power Use in California Small Craft Harbors. Prepared by Adco,
Inc.. May 1995.
California Integrated Waste Management Board. Waste Disposal Rates for Business
Types Solid Waste Characterization Database. 1998.
Corbitt, R. Standard Handbook of Environmental Engineering. McGraw Hill. 1990.
Flowers, John. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, WAVE Program. Personal
Conversation regarding hotel water use.
Gartner, William. Tourism Development: Principles, Processes, and Policies. Van
NostrandReinhold. 1996.
Gehring, Mary. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Green Lights Program.
Personal conversation regarding commercial facility energy use. February,
1999.
Page 62
-------
Goeldner, C.R.. "The 1998 Travel Outlook," Journal of Travel Research. Fall 1997.
Hammond, A., et al. Environmental Indicators: A Systematic Approach to Measuring
and Reporting on Environmental Policy Performance in the Context of
Sustainable Development. World Resources Institute. 1995.
Inter-Continental Hotels and Resorts. Inter-Continental Hotels and Resorts
Environmental Review. 1996.
International Association of Convention & Visitor Bureaus Foundation. 1998IACVB
Foundation Convention Income Survey Report. 1998.
International Association of Amusement Parks and Attractions. 1998 U.S. Amusement
Industry Consumer Survey. 1998.
Kass, David I and Sumiye Okubo,. U.S. Travel and Tourism Satellite Accounts for
1996 and 1997. Survey of Current Business, July 2000.
Kentucky Department for Natural Protection, Division of Environmental Services.
Dissolved Oxygen and Water Quality.
http://water.nr.state.ky.us/ww/ramp/rmdo2.htm. 2000.
Kentucky Department for Natural Protection, Division of Environmental Services.
Total Suspended Solids and Water Quality.
http://water.nr.state.ky.us/ww/ramp/rmtss.htm. 2000.
Keoleian, G., and D. Menerey. Life-Cycle Design Guidance Manual; Environmental
Requirements and the Product System. Prepared for the US EPA, Office of
Research and Development. 1993. EPA/600/R-92/226.
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Management 1988-1992 Statewide
Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, For Our Common Good, Volumes I
and II. 1988.
Mathieson, A., and G. Wall. Tourism: Economic, Physical, and Social Impacts.
Longman Inc. 1982.
Mays, Larry W., ed. Water Resources Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996.
McCool, S.F., and A.E. Watson. Linking Tourism, the Environment, and
Sustainability: Topical Volume of Compiled Papers From a Special Session of
the Annual Meeting of the National Recreation and Park Association,
Minneapolis, M.N. 1995.
Page 63
-------
Metcalf &Eddy. Wastewater Engineering: Treatment, Disposal, and Reuse, 3rded
1991.
Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc.. IMPLAN System (1994 data). 1940 South Greeley
Street, Suite 101, Stillwater, MN 55082, www.implan.com. 1999.
National Golf Foundation. Operating & Financial Performance Profiles ofl8-hole
Golf Facilities in the U.S., 1995 Municipal Facilities Edition. 1995.
National Golf Foundation. Operating & Financial Performance Profiles of9-hple
Golf Facilities in the U.S., 1995 Private Facilities Edition' 1995.
National Golf Foundation. Operating & Financial Performance Profiles ofl8-hole
Golf 'Facilities in the U.S., 1995 Daily Fee Edition. 1995.
National Golf Foundation. Operating & Financial Performance Profiles ofl8-hole
Golf Facilities in the U.S., 1995 Resort Facilities Edition. 1995.
National Golf Foundation. Operating & Financial Performance Profiles ofl8-hole
Golf Facilities in the U.S., 1995 Private Facilities Edition. 1995.
National Golf Foundation. Golf and the Environment: A Status Report and Action
Plan. 1992.
National Golf Foundation. Municipal Golf Facilities: A Growth Industry, NGF
InfoPac, Readings Compiled by the NGF Library. 1999.
National Golf Foundation. Operating & Financial Performance Profiles of9-hole
Golf Facilities in the U.S., 1995 Public Facilities Edition. 1995.
National Restaurant Association. Research, http://www.restaurant.org/research/
research.htm. 1998.
National Ski Areas Association. 1995/96 Economic Analysis of United States Ski
Areas. 1996.
National Ski Areas Association. Kottke National End of Season Survey 1995/96,
Final Report. 1996.
Okubo, Sumiye and Mark A. Planting. U.S. Travel and Tourism Satellite Accounts
for 1992. Survey of Current Business, July 1998, p 8-22.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Towards Sustainable
Development: Environmental Indicators. 1998.
Page 64
-------
Outdoor Recreation Coalition of America and the U.S. Forest Service. Emerging
Markets for Outdoor Recreation in the United States: Based on the National
Survey on Recreation and the Environment. 1995.
Outdoor Recreation Coalition of American and Sporting Goods Manufacturers
Association, Outdoor Products Council. State of the Industry Report: 1995.
1995.
Outdoor Recreation Coalition of American and Sporting Goods Manufacturers
Association, Outdoor Products Council. State of the Industry Report: 1997.
1997.
Planting, Mark A. The Development of a Travel and Tourism Satellite Account for
the US Input-Output Accounts. Proceedings of the 199.8 National Implan
User's Conference, October 15-16, 1998. Washington D.C. vol 2, page 35-
63.
Redlin, M., deRoos, J., Water Consumption in the Lodging Industry. American Hotel
& Motel Association and The School of Hotel Administration at Cornell
University. 1990.
Rhytier, Shwartz, Weneger, Kohnell. Waste Management and Resource Recovery.
Lewis Publishers, 1995.
Rutherford, D. "1989 Convention Center Manager Survey Results," in Introduction to
the Conventions, Expositions, and Meetings Industry. Van Nostrand Reinhold.
1990.
Salvato, J. Environmental Engineering and Sanitation. John Wiley & Sons. 1982.
Schroeder, Edward D. Water and Wastewater Treatment. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1977. '
Teeters, Ken. Assistant Professor, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Harrah College
of Hotel Administration. Personal conversation regarding hotel water and
energy use. February, 1999.
The Recreation Roundtable. Key Findings of the 1997 Recreation Roundtable Survey:
Outdoor Recreation in American 1997. Prepared for the Recreation
Roundtable by Roper Starch. 1997.
The Recreation Roundtable. Key Findings of the 1996 Recreation Roundtable Survey:
Outdoor Recreation in American 1996. Prepared for the Recreation
Roundtable by Roper Starch. 1996.
Page 65
-------
Tobiasson, B. and R. Kollmeyer. Marinas and Small Craft Harbors. Van Nostrand
Reinhold. 1991. ,
Tourism Works for America Council. Tourism Works for America 1997Report. 1997.
Travel Industry Association of America. 1996 Survey of Business Travelers. 1998.
Travel Industry Association of America. 1997 Travel Market Report. 1998.
Travel Industry Association of America. Profile of Travelers Who Participate in
Gambling. 1998.
Travel Industry Association of America. Profile of Travelers Who Participate in
Historic and Cultural Activities. 1997'.
Travel Industry Association of America. Travel Scopeฎ, 1996
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. The 1994 Economic Impacts of
Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Related Recreation on Rational Forest,Lands.
1996.
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the
United States. 1999.
U.S. Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration (ITA). 1998 U.S.
Industry and Trade Outlook: Travel and Tourism. 1998.
U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (EIA). 1995
Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey. 1998.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 19.91 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. 1993.
U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1996 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting,
and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. 1997.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. 1995
American Travel Survey. 1996.
U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics. National
Transportation Statistics 1998. 1998.
Page 66
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards. Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42) .1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. EPA Global
Warming Site: Climate.
http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/climate/index.html. 2000.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation. Inventory of
U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-1997. EPA 236-R-99-003
April 1999.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Federal Activities. Pollution
Prevention/Environmental Impact Reduction Checklist for Recreation and
Tourism, http://es.epa.gov/oeca/ofa/pollprev/tour.html.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources. Exhaust Emission
Factors - Spark-Ignition. 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources. Median Life,
Annual Activity, and Load Factor Values for Nonroad Engine Emissions
Modeling. 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources. Nonroad
Population Estimates: 1998.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources. Office of Mobile
Sources, National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory Website.
http://www.epa.gov/OMSWWW/ann-emit.html. 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Mobile Sources. Regulatory Impact
Analysis: Control of Air Pollution; Emission Standards for New Nonroad
Spark-Ignition Marine Engines. 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation.
Indicators of the Environmental Impacts of Transportation: Highway, Rail,
Aviation, and Maritime Transport. Prepared by Apogee Inc. 1996.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation.
National Demand for Water-Based Recreation. 1995 survey results.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation.
Recreation Tourism and the Environment. Prepared by Apogee, Inc. 1995.
Page 67
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response. Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in, the United States: \t
1992 Update. 1992.
U.S. Interagency Working Group on Sustainable Development Indicators. Sustainable
Development in the United States: An Experimental Set of Indicators. 1997.
U.S. National Park Service. The Economic Benefits of Visitation to Our National
Parks. 1995.
United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. -Indicators for the
Sustainable Management of Tourism. 1993.
United Nations, Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy
Analysis, Statistical Division and World Tourism Organization.
Recommendations on Tourism Statistics. 1994.
White House Conference on Travel and Tourism. National Travel and Tourism
Strategy, National Travel and Tourism Strategy. Report of the October 30-31,
1995 White House Conference on Travel and Tourism, Washington, DC.
1995. : '
White House Conference on Travel and Tourism. Report of the Environmental
Concerns Task Force. 1995.
World Resources Institute. Environmental Indicators: A Systematic Approach to
Measuring and Reporting on Environmental Policy Performance in the
Context of Sustainable Development. 1995.
World Tourism Organization. Report of the International Working Group on
Indicators of Sustainable Tourism to the Environment Committee.
Co-published by the World Tourism Organization and Industry, Science and
Technology Canada. 1993.
World Tourism Organization. What Tourism Managers Need to Know: A Practical
Guide to the Development and Use of Indicators of Sustainable Tourism.
1995.
Zinser, C. Outdoor Recreation. John Wiley & Sons. 1995.
Page 68
-------
APPENDIX A: METHODOLOGY
Introduction
Each tourism and recreation activity included in this model generates economic and
environmental impacts. Some impacts are common to all of the activities, such as
those associated with the supply industries (hotels, transportation, restaurants, and
retail). Other impacts are specific to the activity. This Appendix describes how each
set of impacts was developed and incorporated into the model.
In general, the environmental impacts of the supply industries are held constant in this
model and will not vary with each activity. These include the gallons of water used in
a hotel per night by each guest and the pounds of solid'waste generated in a restaurant
per dollar of expenditure. Activity-specific environmental impacts (e.g., water use for
snoWmaking) are calculated individually for each activity.
In order to apply these environmental impacts to the specific activities, the next step
is to collect demographic and trip characteristics information. For example, it is
necessary to know how often participants take part in an activity, how far they travel
to get there, how long they stay per trip, and how much money they spend. Each of
these pieces of information is activity-specific, and often can be obtained from
industry and government surveys.
The form of these data can vary depending on the source. As a result, two
methodologies were developed: 1) participation and 2) expenditure. Section A of this
Appendix describes these two methodologies.
Section B discusses the methodology used to compile the impacts of the five .
categories of industries in this model: lodging, restaurants, retail, transportation, and
activity-specific. The section describes the type of information collected for each
category and included in the model.
Section C presents the methodologies used to generate calculations for activity-
specific impacts. For each activity, the data sources, any comments or qualifications
about the data, and any estimates/assumptions used to adapt the available data to the
model are discussed.
Page 69
-------
Section A: Comparison of the Two Methodologies
The form and detail of subsector demographic data can vary. Some provide detailed
information about individual behavior of participants in the industry; for example, the
available studies for casinos contain information about the average number of days
spent at casinos, the percent that result in overnight stays, etc. In this case, it was
possible to compute the economic and environmental effects on a participation basis
(Method I).
For other industries, information is only available in an aggregated form. Data are
often reported in financial terms, including gross industry sales and the amount spent
on utilities. In these cases, the impacts were measured according to expenditures
(Method II).
Further descriptions of the two methodologies are provided below. Whenever
possible, estimates were developed under both methodologies, and the estimate with
the more reliable input data was selected.
1. Method I: Participation
This method directly calculates the impacts per participant. It combines activity-
specific information (e.g., number of lodging days and number of meals) with the
general environmental measures for each category (e.g., average gallons of water,
Btus, and pounds of municipal solid waste). In order to arrive at activity-specific,
per-person data, the following parameters are often used:
> Number of participants: The number of participants is generally the most
fundamental variable in the participation methodology. This variable is
frequently used to determine the number of participant trips, participation
days, lodging days, and meals.
> Total participant trips: In the model, participant trips are differentiated into
day trips and overnight trips. This differentiation is important because
lodging impacts are only associated with overnight trips. Participant trips and
average overnight stay length are used to calculate the number of participation
days.
> Number of participation days: This variable is a direct input into the
estimation of both hotel days and meals. This variable is often calculated from
the number of participants, their number of trips, and average trip length.
Similar to participant trips, participation days are also divided into day-trip
Page 70
-------
days and overnight days. The model's assumption for the number of meals
purchased generally depends on if it is a day-trip day or an overnight trip day.
; Average overnight stay length: Together with the number of total
participation trips, the average overnight stay length is used to calculate the
number of participation days. In addition, this number is used to differentiate
between regular hotel days and checkout hotel days. For the estimation of
municipal solid waste generation, this distinction is important as a larger
amount of waste is assumed for checkout days than for regular days.
Page 71
-------
TABLE A-l: INPUTS FOR METHOD I
Impact Category
Subsector Variables
Environmental
Measures
Lodging
Water Use
BOD Generation
TSS Generation
Energy Use
CO Emissions
NOx Emissions
HC Emissions
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Municipal Solid
Waste
Generation
Total lodging days
Total lodging days
Total lodging days
Total lodging days
Total lodging days
Total lodging days
Total lodging days
Total lodging days
Regular lodging days
Checkout lodging days
Average gallons/hotel-
day
Average Ib/hotel-day
Average Ib/hotel-day
Average Btu/hotel-day
Average Ib/hotel-day
Average Ib/hotel-day
Average Ib/hotel-day
Average Ib/hotel-day
Average Ib/hotel-day
Average Ib/checkout-day
Restaurants
\ Water Use
1 BOD Generation
TSS Generation
_
] Energy Use
] CO Emissions
| NOx Emissions
HC Emissions
Greenhouse Gas
Total meals
Total meals
Total meals
Total meals
Total meals
Total meals
Total meals
Total meals
Average gallons/meal
Average Ib/meal
Average Ib/meal
Average Bru/meal
Average Ib/meal
Average Ib/meal
Average Ib/meal
Average Ib/meal
Page 72
-------
2. Method II: Expenditures
The model also uses the expenditures method to estimate water use, energy use, and
municipal solid waste generation for lodging, restaurants, and retail when expenditure
data are available. This method is driven by three principal subsector variables:
subsector-specific hotel expenditures, restaurant expenditures, and retail expenditures.
As with Method I, these subsector variables are combined with constant
environmental measures to obtain each subsector's environmental indicator values for
lodging, restaurants, and retail. The environmental measures used in the participation
methodology are average gallons of water, Btus, and pounds of municipal solid waste
per hotel dollar, per restaurant dollar, and per retail dollar spent.
In contrast to the participation method, the subsector-specific expenditure data are
generally more readily available than participation data. This method therefore does
not rely on additional calculations to the same extent as the participation method.
Table A-2 below presents the subsector variables and environmental measures used in
this method.
Page 73
-------
TABLE A-2: INPUTS FOR METHOD II
Impact Category
Subsector Variables
Environmental
Measures
Lodging
Water Use
BOD Generation
TSS Generation
Energy Use
CO Emissions
NOx Emissions
HC Emissions
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Municipal Solid
Waste
Generation
Hotel expenditures
Hotel expenditures
Hotel expenditures
Hotel expenditures
Hotel expenditures
Hotel expenditures
Hotel expenditures
Hotel expenditures
Hotel expenditures
Average gallons/hotel $
Average Ib/hotel $
Average Ib/hotel $
Average Btu/hotel $
Average Ib/hotel $
Average Ib/hotel $
Average Ib/hotel $
Average Ib/hotel $
Average Ib/hotel $
Restaurants
Water Use
BOD Generation
TSS Generation
Energy Use
CO Emissions
NOx Emissions
HC Emissions
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Municipal Solid
Waste
Generation
Restaurant expenditures
Restaurant expenditures
Restaurant expenditures
Restaurant expenditures
Restaurant expenditures
Restaurant expenditures
Restaurant expenditures
Restaurant expenditures
Restaurant expenditures
Average
gallons/restaurant $
Average Ib/restaurant $
Average Ib/restaurant $
Average Btu/restaurant $
Average Ib/restaurant $
Average Ib/restaurant $
Average Ib/restaurant $
Average Ib/restaurant $
Average Ib/restaurant $
Page 74
-------
TABLE A-2: INPUTS FOR METHOD II
Impact Category
Subsector Variables
Environmental
Measures ,
Retail
Water Use
BOD Generation
TSS Generation
Energy Use
CO Emissions
NOx Emissions
HC Emissions
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Municipal Solid
Waste
Generation
Retail expenditures
Retail expenditures
Retail expenditures
Retail expenditures
Retail expenditures
Retail expenditures
Retail expenditures
Retail expenditures
Retail expenditures
Average gallons/retail $
Average Ib/retail $
Average Ib/retail $
Average Btu/retail $
Average Ib/retail $
Average Ib/retail $
Average Ib/retail $
Average Ib/retail $
Average Ib/retail $
Page 75
-------
Section B: The Five impact Categories
As outlined in the report, this model addresses economic and environmental impacts
associated with four supply sectors of various tourism and recreation subsectors, plus
the activities themselves. The five categories considered are: (1) lodging, (2)
restaurants, (3) retail, (4) transportation, and (5) the tourism or recreation activity
itself. This section discusses all five categories in terms of data inputs and
methodologies used to estimate environmental impacts from the various subsectors.
1. Lodging
Environmental indicators for lodging considered in this model include water use,
wastewater, energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and municipal solid waste
generation. The data were used to calculate indicators via both methods described in
Section A of this Appendix. Much of the lodging information is based on the 1997
Lodging Industry Profile by the American Hotel and Motel Association. This report
contains information on the number of hotel/motel rooms in the United States,
average occupancy rate, average room rate, and total sales. Other sources of market
information include the U.S. Travel and Tourism Satellite Accounts, Statistical
Abstract of the United States 1997, and the TIA reports Tourism Works for America
and Travel Market Report.
Environmental information was collected from several sources. Water use was
obtained from the EPA WAVE Program. Wastewater was calculated from BOD and
TSS concentrations listed in the CRC Handbook of Environmental Control and was
reduced based on average efficiency of wastewater treatment facilities in the United
States as provided in the 1996 CNWS report to Congress and the Water Environment
Federation. Energy consumption was obtained from the Commercial Buildings
Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), published by the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) Energy Information Administration. Air pollutant emissions were calculated
from the CBECS data and with conversion factors listed in Compilation of Air
Pollutant Emission Factors (AP-42), Chapter 1: External Combustion Sources,
published by U.S. EPA. Greenhouse gas emissions are based on the energy figures
produced by DOE and through conversion provided by the U.S. EPA document,
Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-1997. Solid waste
generation figures were obtained from the article, "Waste Management and Resource
Recovery" by Roy Westerman in Resource Recycling, 1991.
Page 76
-------
2. Restaurants
Environmental indicators for restaurants considered in this model include water use,
wastewater, energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, and municipal solid waste
generation. The data were used to calculate indicators via both methods described in
Section A. Industry information was obtained from the U.S. Travel and Tourism
Satellite Accounts, the National Restaurant Association, and the Statistical Abstract of
the, United States, 1997.
Water use data were obtained from the Water Resources Handbook. Wastewater
information was derived from Water and Wastewater Treatment and the CRC
Handbook of Environmental Control and was reduced based on average efficiency of
wastewater treatment facilities in the U.S.. Energy data were obtained from DOE's
CBECS database. Air pollutant emissions and greenhouse gas emissions were based
on CBECS data and determined through conversion factors provided in AP-42,
Chapter 1 and the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks,
respectively. Solid waste data were obtained from the article, "Waste Management
and Resource Recovery."
3. Retail
Environmental indicators for retail considered in this model include water use, energy
use, and solid waste generation. Unlike lodging and restaurants, retail uses only the
expenditure method to calculate the indicators. Economic information was obtained
from the Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1997 and E Source.
Water use data were obtained from the Water Resources Handbook. Wastewater
information was derived from Water and Wastewater Treatment and the CRC
Handbook of Environmental Control and was reduced based on average efficiency of
wastewater treatment facilities in the U.S.. Energy consumption information is based
on DOE's CBECS database and information provided by E Source. Air pollutant
emissions and greenhouse gas emissions are based on the CBECS data and factors
from AP-42, Chapter 1 and the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks, respectively.
4. Transportation
Environmental indicators for transportation considered in this model include air
pollutant emissions and greenhouse gas emissions. Two important statistics used for
these transportation figures are the average Btu per car mile and per plane person-
mile. Both of these were obtained from the U.S. Department of Transportation's
-------
report, National Transportation Statistics 1998. Average miles traveled were
determined on a subsector-specific basis.
Air pollutant emissions from cars were calculated from U.S. EPA Office of Mobile
Sources emissions factors, while emissions from commercial airplanes were
calculated from Department of Transportation estimates. Greenhouse gas emissions
were calculated for cars and planes with emissions data presented in EPA's Inventory,
of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990 1997.
When applying the transportation:related environmental measures, the conceptual
difference between car miles and plane person-miles should be noted. Car miles refer
to the energy use and emissions per vehicle and therefore require an estimation of the
occupancy rate in addition to passenger trips. Plane person-miles, on the other hand,
refer to energy use and emissions per passenger, therefore, passenger trips do not
have to be adjusted but can be applied directly to calculate the indicators.
5. Activity-Specific
Activity-specific environmental indicators for this model include all environmental
categories discussed for the four supply-sectors above: water use, wastewater, energy
use, air pollutant emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, and municipal solid waste
generation. It should be noted, however, that activity-specific indicators are only
calculated where data were available and where the activity was assumed to have an
impact For example, water use is an important factor in the activity-specific impacts
of skiing. On the other hand, since no significant water use is expected from fishing,
this measure was not calculated. . ;
Depending on the tourism and recreation subsector in question, different input
variables and methodologies are used. The specific approaches used are explained in
the subsector discussions in Section C below.
Page 78
-------
TABLE A-3: INPUTS FOR TRANSPORTATION INDICATORS
Impact Category
Subsector Variables
Environmental Measures
Transportation
Energy Use
Air Emissions
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Vehicle miles for cars
Person-miles for
planes
Vehicle miles for cars
Person-miles for
planes
Vehicle miles for cars
Person-miles for
planes
Average Btu/car mile
Average Btu/plane person-mile
Average Ib HC emission/car
mile
Average Ib CO emission/car
mile
Average Ib NOx emission/car
mile
Average Ib HC emission/plane
person mile
Average Ib CO emission/plane
person mile
Average Ib NOx emission/plane
person mile
Average Ib CO2-equivalent
emission/car mile
Average Ib CO2-equivalent
emission/plane person mile
Page 79
-------
Section C: Data Sources, Data Qualifications, and Estimates/Assumptions of
Each Tourism and Recreation Sector
For each subsector the model requires the following input data:
total participants,
total trips,
total days,
total lodging days,
total regular lodging days,
total checkout lodging days, and
total meals.
Much of these data can be obtained from industry and government surveys. However,
the surveys vary by subsector and data are not always in the exact form required by
the model. Often the model input data must be derived from the survey data, other
sources, and estimates and assumptions made by industry experts and the project
team. Descriptions of these data sources, the forms they are in, and any estimates or
assumptions required to obtain the required input data are provided below for each
activity subsector.
Skiing Subsector Data
Data Sources
Data for the skiing sector was compiled from a number of industry associations and
market research publications. These include: TheKottke National End of the Season
Survey, 1995/1996 Economic Analysis of United States Ski Areas, and the 1996-97
Facts and Figures on the On-Snovo Industry all published by the National Ski Areas
Association (NSAA). The NSAA reports primarily contain information on skier
expenditures and resort characteristics. Skier travel behavior, such as average length
of stay, transportation type, and travel time, were obtained from the National Skier
Opinion Survey (NSOS) put together by Leisure Trends, Inc. in Boulder, CO.
Data Qualifications
The NSAA uses "skier visits" as the basis for its participation data. A skier visit
represents one person visiting a ski area for all or any part of a day or night. A ski
Page 80
-------
visit may be for the purpose of skiing or snowboarding. This measure provided the
basis for this analysis as well. :
The actual number of overnight trips taken by skiers was not available. However, the
NSOS data provided information on the percentage of skiers interviewed who were
on an overnight trip and the average total number of days spent on overnight trips in a
year. These data combined with participation data from NSAA were used to
determine the number of overnight skiers and overnight trips. In estimating the
number of overnight trips, it was assumed that each overnight skier only took one
overnight trip. 6.8 million skiers were found to have been on overnight trips of an
average length of 4.7 days. Then, based on an RRC Associates estimate, it was
assumed that 65% of the overnight visits were at a hotel. Assuming one trip per skier
therefore resulted in 4.4 million overnight lodging trips of 4.7 days each. This
assumption may lead to an underestimation of the total number of overnight trips (a
skier could have taken two trips of two days each rather than one trip for four days)
and thus the solid waste and travel indicator values associated with skier visits.
Skier expenditures (including lodging and restaurant expenditures) from NSAA
sources were based on resort revenues only. Therefore they do not capture any
expenditures made away from the resort. However, the expenditure method is not
used in the final determination of the environmental indicator values for this
subsector. Final numbers for environmental impacts associated with lodging and
restaurants were generated from participation data (Method I).
Estimates/Assumptions
An estimate is made on the average meals per person-day. A meal includes any
purchase at a fast-food or a full-service restaurant, even if only for a cup of coffee.
For overnight trips, it was assumed that three meals a day are purchased, while day
trips only included two meals.
The travel distances for skiing were based on average travel time per roundtrip and
percent traveling by air and automobile as reported by NSOS. First, an assumption
was made that the average car and plane travel time are the same. Second, estimates
were made on the average speed of cars (48.6 mph) and planes (450mph) to determine
the distance traveled. The estimated average automobile speed is based on the EPA
MOBILES air emissions model. The estimate for average air speed was taken from
the FAA Statistical Handbook of Aviation.
Water use for snowmaking by ski areas was estimated using three different methods/
Method 1 utilizes values for water use per acre of snowmaking for three ski areas in
page si
-------
different regions of the U.S. (Northeast, Rockies, and west coast) and extrapolated
these values to the total acres of snowmaking in each region (obtained from NSAA
surveys) and then to the U.S. The other two methods are both based on conversations
between Bob Sachs at EPA's Office of Policy and Snow Engineering Inc. in Littleton,
New Hampshire. Method 2 simply assumes 1,000,000 gallons of water are used per
acre of snowmaking per year. This value is reportedly used in the snowmaking
industry for rough estimates of water use. Method 3 utilizes regional-specific
estimates of snowmaking coverage required per year (one complete coverage per year
in the west; 3 complete coverages per year in the east; and 5 complete coverages per
year in the mid-Atlantic). These values were then extrapolated to the total number of
snowmaking acres in each region and then to the entire U.S. An assumption was
made that the midwest region required the same snow coverage as the northeast (3
coverages per year). All three methods generated similar results. Method 3 resulted in
the middle value and was used as the basis for the model.
Energy use by ski areas was based on data from NSAA's economics survey in which
members were asked about their energy costs for snowmaking and lift operations.
Based on information provided by snowmaking equipment manufacturers and
consultants, estimates were made for the portion of energy derived from diesel-
powered engines versus electrically from the grid. Next, average costs for diesel fuel
and electric power obtained from DOE were used to quantify total kilowatt-hours and
Btus of diesel.
Air emissions from snowmaking equipment were estimated from the gallons of diesel
used and emissions factors for diesel boilers from EPA's AP-42.
Golfing Subsector Data
Data Sources
The primary data sources for the golfing subsector were obtained form the National
Golf Foundation (NGF). Golf Travel in the US provided numbers for participation
and travel behavior. Operating and Financial Performance Profiles developed by
NGF for various types of golf courses were used to determine water use and revenue
information for all U.S. golf courses. Total retail expenditures were available from
NGF Golf Consumer Spending in the U.S. The 1997 Travel Market Report published
by TIA, provided information on travel distance and type of transportation used.
Page 82
-------
Data Qualifications
The NGF Golf Travel in the US provided information on three types of golfers: the
golfer, the vacation golf traveler, and the business golf traveler. "Golfers" represent
all US golfers who have golfed at least one round in the previous one year period.
Vacation and business golf travelers are those participants who traveled on vacation
or business and played at least one round of golf while on a trip (one round of golf is
18 holes). For each, type of golfer the report provides: average rounds per year,
average .number of trips per year, average rounds played on trips, and average days on
a .trip. This information was used to analyze the participation and travel behavior of
each type of golfer separately. .
, The 1997 Travel Market Report uses the TIA definition of a trip which is
characterized by travel of 50 miles or more one-way or that involves an overnight
stay. The report describes travel characteristics for several types of travelers:
business, pleasure, and vacation. Based on the definitions for these different
categories, travel characteristic data for pleasure travelers were used for vacation golf
travelers and travel characteristic data for business travelers were used for business
golf travelers.
In order to capture only those lodging days and travel miles associated with golf on
overnight trips that may have included numerous recreational and business activities,
only a portion of the total trip days and miles traveled were attributed to golfing.
First, it was assumed that only one round of golf is played a day to provide some
indication of the number of days associated with golf. While many people may play
more than a single round, others may play less than a full round in a day (nine holes).
Therefore, "golf days" are equivalent to "golf rounds." For example, if a business golf
traveler spent an average of 22.6 days on all trips in a year, having only played 4.9
rounds of golf on those trips, the total lodging days associated with golf is 4.9 days.
Similarly, rather than associate the full travel distance with a trip that was made for
both business and to play golf, only 22% (4.9/22.6) of the travel is attributed to the
golfing subsector. The same method was used for vacation golf travelers.
Total expenditures on golfing were not available. The NGF facility profiles provided
numbers for total revenue for all US golf courses, as well as breakdowns for the
percentage of those revenues from food sales and merchandise. Total hotel and
restaurant expenditures were calculated based on the participation data and average
costs for hotel rooms and meals. Total retail expenditures was available from NGF
Golf Consumer Spending in the U.S. The totals for hotel, restaurant, and retail
expenditures were added to the golf facility revenue total. From this figure, food and
Page 83
-------
merchandise at the golf facility were subtracted to provide total U.S. golf
expenditures.
Final environmental indicator values for lodging and restaurants were generated from
participation data (Method I) for the golfing subsector.
Assumptions/Estimates
It was assumed that only one round of golf is played a day to provide some indication
of the number of days associated with golf. While many people may play more than a
single round, others may play less than a full round in a day (nine holes).
It was assumed that the average meals per person was three per day for overnight trips
and one per day for day trips.
For day travelers, it was assumed that the average round-trip distance to the golf
course would be approximately 20 miles.
Fishing and Hunting Subsectors Data
Data Sources
Data for both the hunting and fishing sectors were obtained from the 1996 National
Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation developed by both
the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Bureau of the Census. These survey data
include information for anglers and hunters on total trips, total days, and activity
expenditures. Additional information on travel distance was found in the 1991
National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.
Data Qualifications
The 1996 survey provides total trips and total days for each activity. The difference
between total trips and total days was used to obtain the total lodging days.
Retail expenditure data in the survey are broken into several categories of equipment.
Any expenditures that could be associated with another sector (e.g., boating, camping
equipment) were excluded.
Final environmental indicator values for lodging and restaurants were generated from
expenditure data (Method II) for these subsectors.
Page 84
-------
Assumptions/Estimates
The 1991 survey provided the number of anglers or hunters traveling various ranges
of distance from home, such as 25 to 49 miles. In order to estimate an average
distance, the median of the range was used. Transportation for all trips was assumed
to be a car except for those trips over 1,000 miles round trip (only 2%), which were
assumed to be air travel.
Both subsectors have a relatively low ratio of total days to total trips. Therefore,
overnight trips were assumed to be for one night.
Boating and Waterside Activities Subsectors Data
Data Sources
The primary data source for both the boating10 and waterside subsectors is the
National Demand for Water Based Recreation survey compiled by EPA. This survey
includes a sample of 13,745 respondents from which data on participation, total trips,
total days, average length of trip, average travel distances by transportation type, and
lodging expenditures were available.
Other industry and technical sources were used for activity specific environmental
data. Most notably, the reports Median Life, Annual Activity, and Load Factor
Values for Nonroad Engine Emissions Modeling; Exhaust Emission Factors
Spark-Ignition; and Nonroad Population Estimates developed by the EPA Office of
Air and Radiation were used to estimate boating emissions. Other sources included
EPA Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation's Indicators of Environmental
Impacts of Transportation which was used to obtain Department of Transportation
data on boating subsector waste generation. Also, the Handbook of Environmental
Engineering was used for waste generation figures by the waterside recreation
subsector, and wastewater data for boating were calculated from the report Marinas
and Small Craft Harbors.
Expenditure data for the boating subsector also were derived from a number of
industry sources. Total expenditures were drawn from TIA's Tourism Works for
America report. Retail expenditures were based on the total sales of boats and boating
equipment from the National Marine Manufacturers Association.
'Boating' refers to the use of small boats, such as motorboats, sailboats, canoes, rafts, etc. The
boating subsector does not include cruise ships.
-------
Data Qualifications
There is some concern for overlap or double-counting between the fishing and
boating subsectors. Fishing and boating obviously often take place at the same time.
However, the survey from which data was collected for the boating subsector asks
respondents specifically to answer questions for "trips you took in the last 12 months
for the primary purpose of boating." As fishing was also included as a separate
activity in this survey, fishing impacts are not likely to be double-counted in the
boating sector numbers. However, it is possible that fishing was a secondary purpose
for some boating trips.
For both sectors, final environmental indicator values for lodging were generated
from expenditure data (Method IT), and values for restaurants were developed from
participation data (Method I).
Estimates/Assumptions < .
The average meals per person-day for each subsector was assumed. For waterside
activities, it was assumed that three meals per day are purchased on overnight trips,
and two meals on day trips. For the boating subsector it was assumed that participants
are likely to have less access to restaurants. It was assumed that two meals are
purchased each day of an overnight trip, and one meal is purchased for day trips.
Information on waterside recreation expenditures was limited. Retail expenditures for
waterside activities were estimated based on each participant spending ten dollars per
year on waterside retail items (e.g., swimming suits and equipment, beach supplies,
etc.). Lodging and restaurant expenditures were calculated using the average cost per
meal and average cost per hotel room from industry organizations (National Hotel and
Motel Association and National Restaurant Association). These values were
combined to obtain a total expenditure figure for waterside activities.
Conferences and Conventions Subsector Data
Data Sources
Participation and travel data for conventions and conferences were obtained from the
1996 Survey of Business Travelers published by TIA. The International Association
of Convention and Business Centers (IACVB) Foundation Convention Income Survey
Report provided information on the expenditures of participants in U.S. conventions.
Page 86
-------
Data Qualifications
The TIA travel data only consider those trips of 50 miles or more each way or trips
that involve an overnight stay. Because some trips to conferences and conventions
will undoubtedly be under 50 miles, the average automobile travel distances obtained
from the TIA report will be somewhat higher than the actual value and automobile
travel distances may therefore be somewhat overestimated for this subsector. It is not
expected that the TIA data will affect airline travel appreciably because air travel
under 50 miles is unlikely. .
The IACVB report uses the "delegate" as its basis for expenditure numbers. A
delegate is defined as an entire "personal travel party" attending a convention.
IACVB measured the average delegate or "personal travel party" to equal 1.6 people.
All statistics for delegates were adjusted to obtain data on actual participants.
Final environmental indicator values for lodging and restaurants were generated from
expenditure data (Method II) for the conferences and conventions subsector.
Assumptions/Estimates
While providing an average distance traveled for all travelers, the travel information
did not provide separate averages for air travel and automobile travel. It was
necessary therefore to develop estimates of average distances traveled by air and by
automobile based on the aggregated travel data. Estimates for air and automobile
travel were obtained from a combination of two calculations. The first assumed that,
on average, total automobile mileage is 8.27 times air mileage for an activity
subsector participant. This average value was calculated using the same ratios from
several travel reports developed by TIA, U.S. Department of Transportation, and
EPA's National Demand for Water Based Recreation survey. The second calculation
set the total mileage for all conference and convention trips equal to the sum of total
automobile mileage and total air mileage. Total mileage was determined by
multiplying total trips by the average mileage. Estimates for auto and air travel were
determined by solving algebraically.
Average water use per convention participant was based on information obtained
from Waste-water Engineering (Metcalf&Eddy, 1991) for the average water use per
seat in an assembly hall.
Electric energy use estimates were based on the U.S. Department of Energy's
Commercial Buildings Survey 1995. This survey provides energy use for various
types and sizes of commercial buildings. Conference and conventions space was
Page 87
-------
assumed to fall under the DOE category of "public assembly." It was also assumed
that conference and convention buildings would typically be over 100,000 square feet
in area. The DOE electric energy consumption rates, and number of buildings of this
type and size in the U.S. were then used to calculate total energy use by conference
and convention centers in the U.S.
Municipal waste generation for the subsector was determined using information from
the Handbook of Environmental Engineering. An estimate for "visitor centers" waste
generation per participant was used as a proxy for conference and convention centers.
Amusement/Theme Parks Subsector Data
Data Sources
The major source of data for the amusement/theme parks subsector was the U.S.
Amusement Industry Consumer Survey published by the International Association of
Amusement Parks and Attractions (LAAPA). The report contains information on
participation, expenditures, and travel.
Data Qualifications -
The basic unit used in the IAAPA survey is the household. Using values for the total
number of households in the U.S. and the total U.S. population from the Bureau of
Census, estimates were developed for total participation, average number of visits,
average length of visit, miles traveled, and expenditures on amusement and theme
park fees and other costs.
Two average expenditure figures were used to obtain the average total expenditures
for amusement/theme parks: "total amount spent per visit - entrance fees/ticket fees"
and "total amount spent per visit - other". These averages were multiplied by the total
visits and added to develop a total expenditures figure for amusement parks. No
further information was available on the breakdown of the "other expenditures." It is
possible that "other expenditures" does not include expenditures outside of the
amusement/theme park possibly resulting in an underestimation of total expenditures
for this subsector. However, expenditure data were not used in the final determination
of environmental indicator values for lodging and restaurants.
Final environmental indicator values for lodging and restaurants were generated using
participation data (Method I) for this subsector.
Page 88
-------
Assumptions I Estimates
The average number of meals per person per day at amusement and theme parks was
assumed. For overnight trips it was assumed that three meals per day are purchased,
and for day trips it was assumed that two meals were purchased.
The average length of stay was estimated from IAAPA survey data. The IAAPA
provides survey data on the number of visits per time length category (e.g., 25-48
hours). We examined the actual question asked of the survey respondents to obtain
these data and determined that the wording was somewhat ambiguous. Some
respondents may have interpreted the length of time spent at the amusement facility to
be the total time away from home and others may have interpreted it to mean the
actual time spent inside the facility. For times given under 24 hours, we assumed the
participants were on day trips. For the time length categories between 24 and 48 hours
we assumed an overnight stay. For the time length categories over 48 hours we
assumed a two night (three day) visit. This last assumption may underestimate the
lodging and restaurant indicator values as some travelers may have stayed longer than
three days on average.
The same method as described above for the conferences and conventions subsector
was used to estimate average mileage for air and automobile travel for the
amusement/theme park subsector.
Water use data for amusement and theme parks was not available. Water use
estimates were based on an average water use provided by Wastewater Engineering
(Metcalf & Eddy,1991) for "picnic parks with flush toilets."
Energy use for amusement/theme parks was generated from numbers obtained for
Universal Studios in Florida from EPA's Energy Star Buildings Program. Based on
their total use and annual attendance, an average per person was developed and
applied to the subsector.
Average municipal waste generation for the subsector was developed from waste
generation data and attendance at Hershey Park in Pennsylvania.
Page 89
-------
Museums and Historical Places Subsector Data
Data Sources
The primary data source for the museums and historical places subsector was the
Profile of Travelers who Participate in Historic and Cultural Activities by TIA. In
addition, the U.S. Amusement Industry Consumer Survey contained information on
average distances traveled for "historical attractions."
Data Qualifications
Participants in the museums and historical places subsector who travel typically
participate in multiple activities per trip. Museums and historical places are just one
of numerous activities in which people participate while traveling. On average,
travelers who engaged in museums and historical places activities participated in a
total of 2.7 different activities per trip. Therefore, not all lodging days, meals, travel
distances, and expenditures were attributed to museums and historical places
activities. For total days, lodging days, travel, and expenditures, 37% (1/2.7) was
counted towards the museums and historical places subsector.
Final environmental indicator values for lodging and restaurants were generated from
participation data (Method I) for this subsector.
Assumptions/Estimates
Assumptions were made on the average meals per person-day. For overnight trips, it
was assumed that three meals per day are purchased, and for day trips it was assumed
that two meals per day are purchased.
The same method as described for the conferences and conventions subsector was
used for this sector to estimate average mileage for air travel and automobile travel
from total travel mileage.
Water use for the museums and historical places subsector was based on the average
use for "visitor centers" provided by Wastewater Engineering (Metcalf&Eddy,1991).
Waste generation for the subsector was based on data for visitor centers obtained from
the Handbook of Environmental Engineering.
Page 90
-------
Casino Gambling Subsector Data,
Data Sources
Data for the casino gambling subsector was primarily obtained from the Profile of
Travelers Who Participate in Gamblingby TIA. In addition, participation rates for
gambling were available through Harrah 's Survey of Casino Visitation. Average
travel distances were obtained form the TIA 1997 Travel Market Report.
Data Qualifications
Similar to the museums and historical places subsector, a certain percentage of
gamblers reported multiple activities, on trips. Therefore for those gamblers who
travel, only a portion of their travel days, lodging days, and travel distances were
attributed to the casino gambling subsector (43% based on gambling being one of 2.3
activities). .
Final environmental indicator values for lodging and restaurants were generated from
participation data (Method I) for the casino gaming subsector.
Assumptions/Estimates
Assumptions were made on the average meals per person-day. For overnight trips, it
was assumed that three meals per day are purchased, and for day trips it was assumed
that two meals per day are purchased.
While the TIA data only included those gamblers who traveled 50 miles or more or
stayed overnight, the Harrah's survey included all visitations to casinos. The
difference between the Harrah's survey total number of trips and the total from TIA
minus those who reported no overnight stay were treated as the day trip population.
The average round trip distance traveled for day trips was estimated to be 100 miles,
Data on water use at casinos were not available. An assumption was made that casino
gamblers, on average, consume three gallons of water per day.
The estimate of electric energy use by casinos was based on information obtained
from EPA's Green Lights Program for an unnamed casino in New Jersey. This
information was extrapolated to all of New Jersey based on information on the
number, size, and attendance of casinos in New Jersey obtained from the New Jersey
Casino Control Commission. Based on the attendance at New Jersey casinos, a per
person electric energy estimate was developed and extrapolated to the entire country.
-------
Land use information was calculated in a similar manner based on square footage
information provided by the New Jersey Casino Control Commission.
Page 92
------- |