Skip to main content

Motivations for Recreating on Farmlands, Private Forests, and State or National Parks

Environmental Management volume 54, pages 138–150 (2014)Cite this article

Abstract

This study explores the importance of different motivations to visit three types of recreational settings—farms, private forests, and state or national parks. Data were collected via a mail-back questionnaire administered to a stratified random sample of households in Missouri (USA). Descriptive and inferential statistics reveal both similarities and discontinuities in motivations for visiting farms, private forests, and state or national parks for recreation. Being with family, viewing natural scenery, and enjoying the smells and sounds of nature were all highly important motivations for visiting the three types of settings. However, all 15 motivations examined were perceived to be significantly more important for visits to state or national parks than to farms or private forests. Findings suggest that individuals are more strongly motivated to recreate at state and national parks relative to farmlands or forests. Post hoc paired t tests comparing motivations between both agricultural settings (farms and private forests) revealed significant differences in eight different recreational motivations. Individuals tended to place more importance on the ability to use equipment and test their skills when considering recreating on private forests. Conversely, social motivations (e.g., doing something with the family) were more important when individuals were considering recreating on farmland. Collectively, the findings suggest individuals expect distinctly different outcomes from their visits to farmlands, private forests, or state or national parks. Consequently, all three types of recreational settings have competitive advantages that their managers could capitalize on when making decisions about how to attract new visitors or produce the most desirable experiences for current recreationists.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Notes

  1. Identical wording was used to solicit motivations for visiting the three types of settings except for one item: slightly different wording was used to assess “Share your outdoor skills with others,” where “outdoor” was replaced with “agritourism” when inquired about visiting agritourism farms.

References

  • Anderson DH, Fulton DC (2008) Experience preferences as mediators of the wildlife related recreation participation: place attachment relationship. Hum Dimens Wildl 13(2):73–88

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson DH, Wilhelm Stanis SA, Schneider IE, Leahy JE (2008) Proximate and distant visitors: differences in importance ratings of beneficial experiences. J Park Recreat Adm 26(4):47–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong JS, Overton TS (1977) Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. J Mark Res 14(3):396–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbieri C, Mahoney E (2009) Why is diversification an attractive farm adjustment strategy? Insights from Texas farmers and ranchers. J Rural Stud 25(1):58–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbieri C, Mshenga P (2008) The role of firm and owner characteristics on the performance of agritourism farms. Sociol Rural 48(2):166–183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbieri C, Mahoney E, Butler L (2008) Understanding the nature and extent of farm and ranch diversification in North America. Rural Sociol 73(2):205–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry JJ, Hellerstein D (2004) Farm recreation. In: Outdoor Recreation for 21st Century America. A Report to the Nation: The National Survey on Recreation and the Environment. pp 149–167

  • Beh A, Bruyere B (2007) Segmentation by visitor motivation in three Kenyan national reserves. Tour Manag 28(6):1464–1471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernath K, Roschewitz A (2008) Recreational benefits of urban forests: explaining visitors’ willingness to pay in the context of the theory of planned behavior. J Environ Manage 89(3):155–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler BJ, Leatherberry EC (2004) America’s family forest owners. J For 102(7):4–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Che D, Veeck A, Veeck G (2005) Sustaining production and strengthening the agritourism product: linkages among Michigan agritourism destinations. Agric Hum Values 22(2):225–234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen H (2008) A study of yoga participants’ leisure motivation, enduring involvement and benefits of leisure (Master thesis). Leader University, Taiwan

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke J (1999) Marketing structures for farm tourism: beyond the individual provider of rural tourism. J Sustain Tour 7:26–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cordell K (2004) Forest recreation. In: Outdoors Recreation for 21st Century America. A Report to the Nation: The National Survey on Recreation and the Environment. pp 141–148

  • Cordell K (2008) The latest on trends in nature-based outdoor recreation and tourism. Forest History Today Spring, Berlin, pp 4–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordell K, Bergstrom J, Hartmann L, English D (1990) An analysis of the outdoor recreation and wilderness situation in the United States: 1989–2040. General Technical Report RM-189. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO

  • Daniel TC, Muhar A, Arnberger A, Aznar O, Boyd JW, Chan KMA, Costanza R, Elmqvist T, Flint CG, Gobster PG, Grêt-Regamey A, Lave R, Muhar S, Penker M, Ribe RG, Schauppenlehner T, Sikor T, Soloviy I, Spierenburg M, Taczanowska K, Tam J, von der Dunk A (2012) Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(23):8812–8819

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devesa M, Laguna M, Palacios A (2010) The role of motivation in visitor satisfaction: empirical evidence in rural tourism. Tour Manag 31(4):547–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillman DA, Smyth JD, Christian LM (2009) Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the total design method, 3rd edn. Wiley, New York, p 499

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver BL (1976) Quantification of outdoor recreationists’ preferences. In: van der Smissen B (ed) Research on camping and environmental education. The Pennsylvania State University, State College, pp 165–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver BL (1983) Master list of items for recreation experience preference scales and domains, Unpublished document, USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Fort Collins, CO

  • Driver BL (1996) Benefits-driven management of natural areas. Nat Areas J 16(2):94–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver BL (2008) Managing to optimize the beneficial outcomes of recreation. Venture, State College

    Google Scholar 

  • Geide C, Harmon L, Baker R (2008) Northern Virginia wineries: Understanding visitor motivations for market segmentation. In: Klenosky DB, Fisher CL (eds) Proceedings of the 2008 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium; 2008 March 30–April 1; Bolton Landing, NY. Gen. Tech. Rep. NRS-P-42. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA, pp 350–356

  • Gil Arroyo C, Barbieri C, Rozier Rich S (2013) Defining agritourism: a comparative study of stakeholders’ perceptions in Missouri and North Carolina. Tour Manag 37:39–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graefe A, Thapa B, Confer J, Absher J (2000) Relationships between trip motivations and selected variables among Allegheny National Forest visitors. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-15-VOL-4

  • Graefe DA, Schuster RM, Green GT, Cordell HK (2010) Management implications of changes in recreation activity motivation across physical settings. In: Watts CE, Fisher CL (eds) Proceedings for the 2009 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium; 2009 March 29–31; Bolton Landing, NY. General Technical Report NRS-P-66. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northern Research Station, Newtown Square, PA, pp 257–263

  • Gursoy D, Chi C, Dyer P (2010) Locals’ attitudes toward mass and alternative tourism: the case of Sunshine Coast, Australia. J Travel Res 49(3):381–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall T, Seekamp E, Cole D (2010) Do recreation motivations and wilderness involvement relate to support for wilderness management? A segmentation analysis. Leis Sci 32(2):109–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpenny E (2006) Environmental behaviour, place attachment and park visitation: a case study of visitors to Point Pelee National Park (Master thesis). University of Waterloo, Waterloo

    Google Scholar 

  • Howell DC (2013) Statistical methods for psychology, 8th edn. Wadsworth, Belmont

    Google Scholar 

  • Huh C, Vogt C (2008) Changes in residents’ attitudes toward tourism over time: a cohort analytical approach. J Travel Res 46(4):446–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilbery B, Bowler I, Clark G, Crockett A, Shaw A (1998) Farm-based tourism as an alternative farm enterprise: a case study from the Northern Pennines, England. Reg Stud 32(4):355–364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iso-Ahola SE (1999) Motivational foundations of leisure. In: Jackson EL, Burton TL (eds) Leisure studies: prospects for the twenty-first century. Venture Publishing Inc., State College, pp 35–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson E (2005) Leisure constraints research: overview of a developing theme in leisure studies. In: Jackson EL (ed) Constraints to leisure. Venture, State College, pp 3–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Jolly D, Reynolds K (2005) Consumer demand for agricultural and on-farm nature tourism. UC Small Farm Center Research Brief 2005–01. http://www.agri-toursolutions.com/pdf/agtourbrief013006.pdf. Accessed 10 June 2010

  • Karppinen H (1998) Values and objectives of non-industrial private forest owners in Finland. Silva Fennica 32(1):43–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kemperman A, Timmermans H (2006) Preferences, benefits, and park visits: a latent class segmentation analysis. Tour Anal 11(4):221–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim H, Borges M, Chon J (2006) Impacts of environmental values on tourism motivation: the case of FICA, Brazil. Tourism Management 27(5):957–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz W, Lewis B (1981) Decision-making framework for nonindustrial private forest owners: an application in the Missouri Ozarks. J For 79(5):285–288

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyle G, Mowen A, Tarrant M (2004) Linking place preferences with place meaning: an examination of the relationship between place motivation and place attachment. J Environ Psychol 24(4):439–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kyle G, Absher J, Hammitt W, Cavin J (2006) An examination of the motivation–involvement relationship. Leis Sci 28(5):467–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lobo R (2001) Helpful agricultural tourism (agritourism) definitions. UC Small Farm Program. www.sfc.ucdavis.edu/agritourism/definition.html. Accessed 25 January 2010

  • Luo Y, Deng J (2008) The new environmental paradigm and nature-based tourism motivation. J Travel Res 46(4):392–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manfredo MJ, Driver BL, Tarrant MA (1996) Measuring leisure motivation: a meta-analysis of the recreation experience preference scales. J Leis Res 28(3):188–213

    Google Scholar 

  • Marques H (2006) Searching for complementarities between agriculture and tourism—the demarcated wine-producing regions of northern Portugal. Tour Econ 12:147–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCool S, Reilly M (1993) Benefits segmentation analysis of state park visitor setting preferences and behavior. J Park Recreat Adm 11(4):1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • McEwen J (2010) Examining the interrelationship of motivation and place attachment in a residential 4-h camping environment. Master’s thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA

  • McGehee NG (2007) An agritourism systems model: a Weberian perspective. J Sustain Tour 15(2):111–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGehee NG, Kim K (2004) Motivation for agri-tourism entrepreneurship. J Travel Res 43(2):161–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Middleton VTC, Fyall A, Morgan M (2009) Marketing in travel and tourism, 4th edn. Elsevier Ltd., Oxford, p 502

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman DH, Wear DN (1993) Production economics of private forestry: a comparison of industrial and nonindustrial forest owners. Am J Agric Econ 75:674–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson N, Black R, McCool S (2001) Agritourism: motivations behind farm/ranch business diversification. J Travel Res 40(1):19–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nilsson PA (2002) Staying on farms—An ideological background. Ann Tour Res 17(3):227–352

    Google Scholar 

  • Ollenburg C, Buckley R (2007) Stated economic and social motivations of farm tourism operators. J Travel Res 45(4):444–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Packer J, Ballantyne R (2002) Motivational factors and the visitor experience: a comparison of three sites. Curator Mus J 45(3):183–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park D, Yoon Y (2009) Segmentation by motivation in rural tourism: a Korean case study. Tour Manag 30(1):99–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierskalla CD, Lee ME, Stein TV, Anderson DH, Nickerson R (2004) Understanding relationships among recreation opportunities: a meta-analysis of nine studies. Leis Sci 26(2):163–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie B, Tkaczynski A, Faulks P (2010) Understanding the motivation and travel behavior of cycle tourists using involvement profiles. J Travel Tour Mark 27(4):409–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpley R, Sharpley J (1997) Rural tourism: an introduction. Thomson Business Press, London, p 165

    Google Scholar 

  • Siderelis C, Moore RL, Yeung Y-F, Smith JW (2012) A nationwide production analysis of state park attendance in the United States. J Environ Manage 99:18–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith J (2008) Utah off-highway vehicle owners’ specialization and its relationship to environmental attitudes and motivations. Master thesis, Utah State University, Logan, UT

  • Smith WB, Miles PD, Vissage JS, Pugh SA (2003) Forest resources of the United States, 2002. General Technical Report NC-241. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN

  • Stein T, Denny C, Pennisi L (2003) Using visitors’ motivations to provide learning opportunities at waterbased recreation areas. J Sustain Tour 11(5):404–425

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teasley RJ, Bergstrom JC, Cordell HK, Zarnoch SJ, Gentle P (1999) Private lands and outdoor recreation in the United States. In: Cordell HK, Betz C, Bowker JM, English DBK, Mou SH, Bergstrom JC, Teasley RJ, Tarrant MA, Loomis J (eds) Outdoor recreation in American life: a national assessment of demand and supply trends. Sagamore Publishing, Champaign, pp 183–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Tew C, Barbieri C (2012) The perceived benefits of agritourism: the provider’s perspective. Tour Manag 33(1):215–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thapa B, Confer J, Mendelsohn J (2004) Trip motivations among water-based recreationists. Paper presentation at the 2nd International Conference on Monitoring and Management of Visitor Flows in Recreational and Protected Areas. Rovaniemi, Finland, pp 208–212

  • U.S. Census Bureau (2011) State & county quick facts—Missouri. http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/29000.html. Accessed 23 March 2011

  • USDA Forest Service (2012) About Us. http://www.fs.fed.us/aboutus. Accessed 17 Jan 2012

  • USDA: ERS (2004) Measuring rurality: Rural-urban continuum codes. http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/rurality/ruralurbcon/. Accessed 9 Sept 2010

  • USDA: NASS (2009) 2007 Census of agriculture: United States Summary and State Data. Volume 1, Part 51. http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/index.asp. Accessed April 2011

  • Veeck G, Che D, Veeck J (2006) America’s changing farmscape: a study of agricultural tourism in Michigan. Prof Geogr 50(3):235–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogelsong H, Graefe A, Confer J, Solan D, Kramp J (1998) Relationships between motivations, activities and settings: the recreation opportunity spectrum within the Delaware state park system. In: Vogelsong HG, (comp, ed) Proceedings of the 1997 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium; 1997 April 6–9; Bolton Landing, NY. Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-241. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, Radnor, PA, pp 124–127

  • Walker G, Deng J, Dieser R (2001) Ethnicity, acculturation, self-construal, and motivations for outdoor recreation. Leis Sci 23(4):263–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walls M, Darley S, Siikamäki J (2009) The state of the great outdoors: America’s parks, public lands, and recreation resources. Resources for the Future. 1616 P Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036-1400. http://www.rff.org/RFF/Documents/RFF-RPT-ORRG-State-of-Outdoors.pdf. Accessed 25 Oct 2010

  • Weber D, Anderson DH (2010) Contact with nature: recreation experience preferences in Australian parks. Ann Leis Res 13(1–2):46–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilhelm Stanis SA, Schneider IE, Anderson DH (2009) State park visitors’ leisure time physical activity, constraints and negotiation strategies. J Park Recreat Adm 27(3):21–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Yuan MS, McEwen D (1989) Test for campers’ experience preference differences among three ROS setting classes. Leis Sci 11(3):177–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors express their gratitude to the University of Missouri Research Board for funding this project. Our thanks are also due to the journal editors and the reviewers for their thorough suggestions and comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Tourism Management Department, Universidad San Ignacio de Loyola, Av. La Fontana 550, Lima, 12, Peru

    Sandra Sotomayor

  2. Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, North Carolina State University, 3028D Biltmore Hall, Raleigh, NC, 27695, USA

    Carla Barbieri

  3. Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism, University of Missouri, 105 Anheuser-Busch Natural Resources Bldg., Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Sonja Wilhelm Stanis

  4. Department of Forestry, University of Missouri, 203 Anheuser-Busch Natural Resources Bldg., Columbia, MO, 65211, USA

    Francisco X. Aguilar

  5. Digital Imagery Visualization Laboratory, North Carolina State University, 5112 Jordan Hall, Campus Box 7106, Raleigh, NC, 27603, USA

    Jordan W. Smith

Authors
  1. Sandra Sotomayor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carla Barbieri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sonja Wilhelm Stanis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Francisco X. Aguilar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jordan W. Smith
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carla Barbieri.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sotomayor, S., Barbieri, C., Wilhelm Stanis, S. et al. Motivations for Recreating on Farmlands, Private Forests, and State or National Parks. Environmental Management 54, 138–150 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-014-0280-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-014-0280-4

Keywords

  • Agritourism
  • Farms
  • Motivations
  • Private forests
  • Recreation experience preference