The significance of environmental values for destination competitiveness and sustainable tourism strategy making: insights from Australia's Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area

Sustainable destinations must deliver products that perform better than their competitors and at the same time protect key environmental drawcards. This research explores the environmental–economic interface of a major destination, both as a case study in how to approach this complex relationship and as a contribution to the methodology of tackling the need for understanding competitive pressures as part of sustainable tourism strategy creation. Using the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area (GBRWHA) as an example, the paper assesses 21 key environmental values, including Indigenous culture, against market-based factors, in terms of their importance for visitors as regional drawcards, satisfaction with them and the way in which changes in them might affect trip numbers and duration across different regions. While the natural values of the GBRWHA are found to be the most important drawcards, satisfaction scores were significantly lower than importance scores for a number of these values. Visitors responded more negatively to the prospect of environmental degradation than to the prospect of a 20% increase in local prices: the detailed impact depends, however, on location and visitor mix. Clear ocean, healthy coral reefs, healthy reef fish, and lack of rubbish were the top four most important values

Economic values and Indigenous Protected Areas across Northern Australia. Final report

We undertook a systematic review of the empirical valuation literature relating to benefits associated with Indigenous protected Areas (IPAs), revealing that some benefits are quantified in monetary terms more frequently than others, both in Australia and elsewhere. This does not mean that the quantified benefits are more important than other benefits. Instead it indicates that they are easier to quantify. As a result, there are substantive gaps in our understanding of numerous benefits – of their value to different people, in different contexts, in their entirety, and relative to other benefits (Section 5). Our research indicated that while a lack of price does not mean lack of value, it often means lack of ‘visibility’ or ‘presence’. So, vitally important non-market goods and services associated with IPAs may be overlooked, particularly by decision-makers who are driven by quantitative and/or economic data. It is important to find ways of highlighting the importance of those non-market benefits, so that resources can be directed in a manner that generates most benefit per dollar spent

Multiple co-benefits of Indigenous land and sea management programs across northern Australia: final report

Our aim is to generate information that can be used to help design, monitor, and/or select ILSMPs to help meet the goals of key stakeholders. We focus on goals above and beyond environmental goals – i.e. those that can be considered to be co-benefits. These diverse goals include seeking to enhance individual wellbeing, help communities meet their aspirations, support the development of Indigenous businesses and/or promote regional economic development. When determining what an ‘Indigenous land and sea management program’ is, we visualise a Venn diagram with intersecting sets. • Set one: There are innumerable traditional Indigenous land and sea management activities or practices that have been going on for tens of thousands of years – these include, but are not limited to getting out on country, looking after waterholes, hunting and burning (Section 2.1.1). • Set two: Government and non-government organisations fund a variety of different programs, some of which support Indigenous people and some of which support land management (Section 2.1.2). Not all land mangagement programs facilitate Indigenous practices, and not all Indigenous programs facilitate land management. For the purposes of this project, we focus on the intersection of those two sets, defining an ILSMP as a program that funds or supports traditional Indigenous land management activities

Using measures of wellbeing for impact evaluation: proof of concept developed with an Indigenous community undertaking land management programs in northern Australia

Combining insights from literature on the Theory of Change, Impact Evaluation, and Wellbeing, we develop a novel approach to assessing impacts. Intended beneficiaries identify and rate factors that are important to their wellbeing, their satisfaction with those factors now, and before an intervention. Qualitative responses to questions about perceived changes and causes of change are linked to quantitative data to draw inferences about the existence and/or importance of impact(s). We use data from 67 Ewamian people, in a case study relating to Indigenous land management, to provide proof of concept. 'Knowing that country is being looked after' and 'Having legal right/access to the country' were identified as important to wellbeing, with perceptions that Native Title determination, declared Indigenous Protected Area and associated land management programs have had a significant and positive impact on them. Further method testing might determine the utility of this approach in a wide range of settings

The Crowding Out of Complex Social Goods

The valuation of ecosystem services to inform natural resource management and development has gained acceptance in many arenas. Yet, contemporary economic valuation is constrained to the appraisal of simple goods that generate benefits that accrue to individuals, neglecting complex goods that generate benefits that accrue to society more broadly. Methodological barriers to the valuation of complex social goods have led to their frequent omission from natural resource management deliberations. The prevailing valuation paradigm that focuses on simple individual goods may erode conservation efforts by crowding out the institutions and behaviours that support socially constructed ecosystem service values. Erosion of these values ultimately harms the environment and society as a whole. The institutionalisation of appropriate methods for estimating the value of complex social goods alongside existing methods for valuing simple individual goods within international conservation, development and policy-making discourses, is therefore an important evolution for sustainable natural resource management

Integrated models, frameworks and decision support tools to guide management and planning in Northern Australia. Final report

[Extract] There is a lot of interest in developing northern Australia while also caring for the unique Australian landscape (Commonwealth of Australia 2015). However, trying to decide how to develop and protect at the same time can be a challenge. There are many modelling tools available to inform these decisions, including integrated models, frameworks, and decision support tools, but there are so many different kinds that it’s difficult to determine which might be best suited to inform different decisions. To support planning and development decisions across northern Australia, this project aimed to create resources to help end-users (practitioners) to assess: 1. the availability and suitability of particular modelling tools; and 2. the feasibility of using, developing, and maintaining different types of modelling tools

The ability of community based natural resource management to contribute to development as freedom and the role of access

Ribot's access constraints mediate the generation of development benefits from community based natural resource management and co-management systems and programs. Context-specific access constraints also interact with diverse understandings of what constitutes development to create benefits that are non-linear through time, multi or uni-level, prone to hysteresis, socially mediated, vary through space and experienced quite differently by different social actors. In hybridized State-community gover-nance arrangements, this complexity results in ongoing tensions and entanglements as different social actors seek to leverage available opportunities to overcome or circumvent short or longer-term access constraints in pursuit of their understanding of development. In turn, this complexity makes it difficult to understand the full suite of potential development benefits generated by community based natural resource management or co-management structures. Here, we explore potentially competing conceptu-alisations of development, and the contribution of community based natural resource management to these understandings of development. Using Australia's Indigenous Land and Sea Management Programs to inform this exploration, we show that development is primarily conceptualised as 'control, leadership, empowerment and independence,' in line with Sen's development as freedom, by the Indigenous groups involved in these programs. State actors understand development in ways that more closely align with Sen's functionings, or a capability list-for example, the relative uptake of jobs and training. Despite this potential mismatch, some Indigenous groups have been able to leverage opportunities available to them, including those provided by the programs, to overcome access constraints to their understandings of 'freedom'. We conclude by offering suggestions as to how community based natural resource management programs could be improved

The role of certification in advancing the sustainable tourism agenda: a case study of the ECO certification scheme in the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area (WTWHA)

With the tourism industry expected to double in size over the next decade and given the wide evidence of its negative consequences, many are concerned that future tourism development will be unsustainable. A key tool to help mitigate tourism's negative environmental and social externalities is the certification of tourism products. Certification requires tourism businesses to meet a variety of criteria related to different dimensions of sustainability. It is thus heralded as a key measure in advancing the agenda for sustainable tourism. However, despite the many claimed benefits, to date there is no concrete evidence to substantiate any of those claims, particularly that which claims certification provides economic benefits to businesses: and it is that which formed the focus of this research. Specifically, this study sought to improve our understanding of consumer demand for certified sustainable tourism products (be it tourist demand for certified tourism products, or tourism operator demand for endorsement by a certification provider.\ud \ud To fulfill this aim, I hypothesised that: 1) certification is multi-faceted requiring a multi-attribute examination; 2) tourist demand depends on their perceptions of certification and its different attributes; and 3) operator demand depends on their perceptions of different attributes of certification and the (perceived) ability of certification to raise revenues (it also depends upon the ability of certification to lower costs, but that complex problem is left as a task for future research). I focused on five objectives, each of which is directly linked to an identified research gap. They are to:\ud \ud 1. Determine if visitors are willing to pay a premium for certified products and to see how an increase in price would impact on operator revenues\ud \ud 2. Improve our understanding of visitors' perceptions about the importance of different attributes of certification (linked to dimensions of sustainability) and about the performance of tourism operators on those attributes\ud \ud 3. Improve our understanding of tourism operators' perceptions about the importance of different attributes of certification (linked to dimensions of sustainability) and about their performance on those attributes\ud \ud 4. Examine the alignment between visitor and operator perceptions on the importance of and performance in different attributes\ud \ud 5. Determine if tourists are willing to pay more for some attributes than for others and if visitors are willing to pay more for attributes which are deemed 'important'\ud \ud The theoretical background of this research is based on the Lancasterian view of utility which explicitly notes that products have multiple attributes and that it is the attributes of a product (rather than the products per se) that yield utility. As such, if one want to understand the demand for a product (be it certification, or a certified product), one must understand the demand for its attributes.\ud \ud Information was provided via specific analysis of the ECO certification program, chosen principally for its coverage of multiple domains (attributes) of sustainability. Data were collected from a sample of 610 visitors and 48 operators to the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area (WTWHA), an area known to contain some of the largest concentrations of visitors and operators and with easy, yearround access. The attributes focused on were those which: a) the ECO certification program assessed; and b) were associated with a priority of the Wet Tropics Management Authority. These were: Natural area focus (Nature), Interpretation (Interpretation), Environmental sustainability (Environment), Contribution to conservation (Conservation), Working with local communities (Community), Cultural component (Culture), Customer satisfaction (Customer) and Responsible marketing (Marketing).\ud \ud A dichotomous choice contingent valuation (CV) approach was used to address objective 1. Specifically, I asked visitors: a) if they would prefer a certified operator at the same price; and b) if they would be willing to pay more for a certified operator. With no difference in price, visitors showed a preference for ECO-certified operators and many visitors were willing to pay more for certification, but, for every price scenario presented, the percentage (%) of visitors not willing to pay a premium exceeded the percentage (%) price increase, implying that a price rise would decrease revenues. Evidently, for operators to sign up for ECO certification and to then charge a price premium (to possibly cover any administrative or operational costs associated with that decision) may not make financial sense, unless operators are able to 1) reduce costs and/or 2) attract new customers.\ud \ud In the case of the latter, the financially well-off, well-educated, female and the young visitors were found as potential market segments when marketing certified products. These groups of visitors were statistically more likely to express a willingness to pay (WTP) for certified products than others. Moreover, it was found that being 'informed' about certification per se, is not necessarily effective in determining WTP. Instead, it is consumer perceptions about the effectiveness of certification that is most significant.\ud \ud Furthermore, to attract new customers, operators must understand what consumers most care about and whether this matches with the requirements of certification. But, as noted above, certification is not a simple 'product': it is complex and multi-faceted, encompassing various domains (attributes) of sustainability. Hence to address objective 2, tourists were presented with the list of attributes above, and asked about their perceptions of the importance of those various attributes and their perceptions about the performance of tourism operators on those same criteria. Responses were elicited on a five-point Likert scale. Data were analysed graphically, using non-parametric statistical tests and using a modified version of Importance-Performance-Analysis (IPA).\ud \ud Results indicate a strong alignment between visitor perceptions about what is 'important' and items assessed by the ECO certification scheme, although key attributes that are held to be particularly important the Wet Tropic Management Authority, were ranked (relatively) low in importance (e.g. Conservation, Environment and Culture).\ud \ud As to the perceived performance of operators on these attributes, visitors consistently judged the performance of ECO-certified operators to be 'better' than their non-ECO certified counterparts. However, these observations may not necessarily denote actual performance, further validation of these observations is required. Moreover, many attributes are 'invisible', in the sense that efforts made by operators on these attributes are unknown to the visitor. Accordingly, an accurate assessment and depiction of performance cannot be made – although having information about perceptions of performance is nonetheless enlightening.\ud \ud Important findings also emerged from the comparison of importance and performance. Where significant differences between these two measures existed, ECO-certified operators' performance scores exceeded importance scores. This suggests that customers are more satisfied with ECOcertified products than they are with the non-ECO certified products. As such, ECO-certified operators seem to be effectively competing on non-price factors, a highly desirable outcome in extremely competitive industries such as tourism.\ud \ud The commercialisation of certified products also depends on operator support, hence the significance of objective 3 which sought to understand operator views on the importance and of their (self-assessed) performance on the various attributes. This was assessed using a similar approach to that used for tourists to also enable examination of the alignment between these two different views (objective 4). The same attributes (Nature, Marketing and Community) where deemed to be the most important to both visitors and operators, indicating that both 'value' the same things. ECO-certified operators self-scored their performance higher than non-ECO certified operators across the majority of attributes – however, no significant differences in performance were found. Nevertheless, according to visitors, ECO-certified operators out-performed their noncertified counterparts on many attributes and these differences were statistically significant.\ud \ud Tourist WTP for these attributes was also explored (objective 5) using a modified Contingent Valuation approach (developed using insights from choice modeling that allowed a fine grained analysis of product attributes). Across all three products, visitors were more likely to express a high WTP for Community, Environment and Nature. Significantly, visitors' perceived importance of specific attributes aligned well with their stated WTP for the same attributes. From a purely commercial perspective, this identifies the attributes on which operators need to focus most to maximize their benefit from visitors' WTP profile. It also increases the confidence of my conclusions about attributes that are most/least important to visitors.\ud \ud In line with the aims of this research, it can thus be concluded that despite a WTP for ECO certification, certified operators may not necessarily see an increase in revenue, should they decide to raise prices above their non-certified counterparts. In fact, raising price will impact negatively on revenues since the quantity of customers lost far exceed any potential increase in prices. The wider implication of this finding is that certification schemes may not be able to self-finance. Therefore, a convincing argument for certification as a public good would provide prima facie support for regulation. The next step is to confirm the public good benefits of certification and this requires information on the environmental and social indicators of performance.\ud \ud Visitors in this research clearly indicated that they perceive certification to be contributing positively to sustainability and in many instances, considered the performance of ECO-certified operators to be 'better' than the alternative. Moreover, the study found that when attributes of certification are considered to be important, visitors are willing to pay for them. The implications of these findings are that consumers have a strong desire for products that are authentically sustainable, they expect certification to make a 'difference' – if they believe certification really can make a 'difference', they are WTP for it. Accordingly, it is vital that certification programs are able to demonstrate credible evidence of its positive impacts if consumers are to fully support it as a measure of sustainability. If this cannot be done, visitors may not choose to purchase certified products, and operators may not choose to be certified. Consequently, the potential benefits of such an important 'tool' for managing the sustainable growth of the industry may never be realised

ECO certification and tourism operators: marketing and operational issues

The objectives of this paper are twofold: (1) to examine the alignment between visitor and operator perceptions on the importance of different attributes of certification, and (2) to look for evidence of the belief that certification improves operators' performance. Over 600 visitors and 48 tourism operators in and around the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area, Australia, provided data on the popular ECO Certification Program ®. Using just the mean scores of importance, the study found that visitors and operators had similar views: both perceived Nature and Marketing as the most important attributes and Conservation and Culture as the least important attributes. However, statistically, operators 'valued' Nature, Community, Customer and Marketing significantly higher than visitors. To examine that certification improves performance, we collected data about operators’ subjective views of their own performance (self-assessed) and visitors’ subjective views of operator performance. These perceptions of performance were then validated with independent, actual objective measures. To facilitate comparisons, data were segmented according to certification status. Across the majority of attributes, ECO certified operators self-scored their performance higher, but not significantly so, than did their non-ECO certified counterparts. According to visitors, ECO certified operators out-performed their non-ECO certified counterparts on many attributes and these were statistically significant. Objective measures of performance confirmed these perceptions: ECO certified operators are 'better' on most attributes – however, these results need to be interpreted with caution, given the small sample size

ECO certification in Queensland's Wet Tropics World Heritage Area: is it good for business?

Certification is heralded as one of the most effective measures for advancing the sustainable tourism agenda. Yet, if it is to do so, it must encourage tourism operators to alter their behavior. When assessing the success of a certification scheme, it is, therefore, essential to look at the degree to which the scheme engages those who would otherwise be unin­terested - hypothesised here to be those who are primarily motivated by profit. Reasoning that certification can raise profits if it raises revenues and/or decreases costs, this chapter examines both existing literature and new empirical data on the popular Australian ECO certification scheme to draw tentative conclusions about the circumstances in which certification is likely to increase operator revenues. It finds little evidence to suggest that certification will raise revenues unless consumers can, simultaneously, be convinced that certification is capable of 'making a difference'. The policy implication of this finding is that certification schemes must be able to clearly articulate and market this message to tourists if they are to attract more voluntary members and thus advance the sustainable tourism agenda. This is, of course, unless they are concurrently able to lower operator costs - a topic worthy of future study