Full text of DOI:10.1093/forestry/73.2.103

National outdoor recreation
demand and supply in Finland:
an assessment project
E. POUTA1, T. SIEVÄNEN2 AND M. HEIKKILÄ3
1 University of Helsinki, Department of Forest Economics, PO Box 24, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
2 Finnish Forest Research Institute, Unioninkatu 40 A, FIN-00170 Helsinki, Finland
3 Finnish Environment Institute, PO Box 140, FIN-00251 Helsinki, Finland
Introduction
important to assess the demand both for local
recreation facilities and also for resource-based
This paper introduces the National Outdoor opportunities further from home. When planning
Recreation Demand and Supply Assessment recreation areas and trails, which may extend
Study (LVVI) in Finland (Sievänen, 1998). The over municipal borders, information is needed to
project involves collecting statistics and main- improve municipal co-operation. The demand for
taining databases on a continuous basis in order nature-based tourism is expected to grow as
to monitor changes in people’s participation in many rural communities seek new sources of
outdoor activities and behaviour patterns; as well income. The availability of data on recreation
as changes in the supply of recreation oppor- supply and demand will allow for more accurate
tunities and the quality of services. At present, market analysis and service planning. The assess-
Finland lacks detailed statistics and information ment will facilitate the integration of planning at
about the demand for outdoor recreation facili- the regional level with regard to forestry, land-
ties. There is also a need for more information scaping, land-use, tourism and other business
about the recreation resources provided by differ- development programmes. Continuous monitor-
ent agencies. A comprehensive database is needed ing and a better understanding of the use and
in order to direct outdoor recreation policy supply of recreational resources are also required
appropriately.
in order to assess the impact on the environment
In Finland, outdoor recreation is based on the and to implement a policy of socially sustainable
principle of ‘everyman’s right’, which means that use of natural resources.
all forests, shores and water areas, including
those that are privately owned, are open to public
access. Although access is permitted, the quality
of the environment in timber production forests
Recreation demand study
does not always meet the requirements for recre- The demand for recreation services is measured
ational use. State and municipal agencies and by participation rates in outdoor activities.
private firms also offer designated recreation Another measure of demand is the number of
areas and services. Public recreation agencies days or trips devoted to each activity. These
need information about recreation resources and measurements are focused on recreation area
their use in order to allocate their future invest- types, and on areas as defined by owner group.
ments effectively, and for the efficient manage- Recreation use is also classified as local or
ment of their resources. It is particularly resource-based recreation. Models of demand for
© Institute of Chartered Foresters, 2000
Forestry, Vol. 73, No. 2, 2000

104
FORESTRY
different kinds of recreational facilities can be northern rural community, people spent more
used to estimate probable future participation time (30 vacation days) and money (EUR 553) on
rates and frequencies and can also be used to outdoor recreation. Among the most popular
predict the future need for recreational areas. In activities are fishing and snowmobiling, and
an economic sense, demand models make it poss- people usually take part in these activities in areas
ible to evaluate the benefits of outdoor recreation. which are not designated for recreation. In the
Comparing the benefits of recreation with the southern city areas, less time (20 vacation days)
costs of providing recreation services is a useful and less money (EUR 392) are spent on recre-
tool for evaluating public sector recreation invest- ation activities. Swimming and sunbathing are
ments.
popular and people typically visit municipal
Some characteristics of outdoor recreation in recreation areas.
Finland challenge the study of recreation demand.
Firstly, because participation in activities and par-
ticipation frequencies vary seasonally, data have
to be collected all year round. Secondly, because
Recreation supply study
of ‘everyman’s rights’, some outdoor recreation In the supply study, a nation-wide inventory of
takes place in the normal living environment close different types of recreation areas, trails and other
to home on private land not in designated recre- recreation services is being carried out. The data
ation areas. This makes it difficult to specify the collected include the amount and location of
destination area.
available recreational areas as well as qualitative
The sample size in the main population survey descriptions of services and other information.
is about 12 000 people. A random sample is Data on the provision of recreation services are
drawn from the population between the ages of gathered using questionnaires from all 455
15 and 75 years, and is connected to the national municipalities and from two state agencies. Infor-
labour study. The sample needs to be large for mation about recreation areas is saved in a GIS-
two main reasons. Firstly, having a large sample database, which will later be merged with the
will ensure that there will be enough incidences of database holding information on sports areas and
some new types of recreation activities to monitor facilities. These two databases are accessible for
changes in participation rates in future. Secondly, public use.
there is a need to get a sufficient number of
Analyses of supply data will produce quality
responses to provide information about the criteria and indicators for the designated recre-
demand for recreational services at a regional ation areas. The supply assessment will also give
level. The survey is being done during the 22 valuable information about the state of
months between August 1998 and May 2000. implementation of land-use plans within the
About 800–1000 telephone interviews are con- different regions.
ducted every second month. Printed question-
naires are then mailed out to those respondents
who have participated in outdoor recreation
activities in the 12 months preceding the tele-
Comparison of demand and supply
phone interview. In this way, all seasons are rep- The issues examined in this comparison of
resented in the sample, and some of the bias demand and supply include, firstly, whether the
caused by memory failure will be minimized. The actual supply of recreation opportunities meets
topics covered by specific survey questions are the demand for outdoor recreation and, secondly,
presented in Table 1.
how demand and the supply are likely to change
A pilot study was conducted in 1997 (Sievänen, in the future. From the policy-making point of
1998). The objectives of the pilot study were to view, an interesting question is what kind of
test survey instruments, questionnaires and the action will be needed in order to achieve a balance
general data collection organization of the between demand and supply. Area-based indexes
project. The pilot study uncovered examples of in the GIS-database make it possible to compare
interesting differences between recreation behav- recreation areas and their use in different parts of
iour in northern and southern Finland. In the the country both on an owner group basis and on

NATIONAL OUTDOOR RECREATION IN FINLAND
Table 1: Questionnaire design
105
Telephone interview
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Issue
Topics of questions
Participation in outdoor recreation
activities in last 12 months
Frequencies of participation in
activities
participation in 90 different activities (yes/no)
number of times, number of times when this activity was
the main reason for recreation
Last recreation trip
when, activity, length of time
Hindrances to outdoor recreation
Socio-economic background
health, time, distance . . .
gender, age, education, occupation
Mail survey
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– –––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Issue
Topics of questions
Last recreation trip close to home
when, activity, length of time, with whom, where
and the characteristics of the area, travel distance, travel
time, expense, intention to recreate next time
when, activity, length of time, with whom, where
and characteristics of the area, travel distance, travel
time, expense, intention to travel next time
when, activity, length of time, where
number of recreation visits, daily, during last week,
hours of recreation, daily, during last week
amount of vacation days spent on outdoor recreation
communal, state owned, private
Last recreation trip including an
overnight stay
Travels abroad for recreation
Time spent in recreation
Recreation areas and services used
number of days on each area type
Money spent on recreation
Household production factors
Socio-economic background
clothing, equipment, travel . . .
skills, equipment owned, recreation areas near the living
environment income, household size, education, urbanization level of
home community, amount of leisure time
an activity basis. One of the key indexes is ‘recre- References
ation trips or days per hectare of recreation area’.
Sievänen, T. 1998 (ed.) LVVI-esitutkimusraportti. Met-
The supply of recreation areas is assumed to have
an effect on the demand for recreation facilities.
This effect is being studied, by including supply
indexes in demand models.
säntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja 702, 1–109.
[LVVI pilot study report. Finnish Forest Research
Institute Working Papers 702, 1–109. In Finnish].