Historically, visitor management in protected areas has been concerned largely with visitor impacts and emphasis has been placed on managing negative impacts. This has involved controlling visitor numbers, attempting to modify visitor behaviour and also modifying the resource. These approaches can be divided into ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ categories (Ling Kuo, 2002). ‘Hard’ visitor management approaches involve physical management, regulatory management and economic management. ‘Soft’ approaches make use of education and interpretation. While the approach of managing impacts has its merits, and has met with some success, it has tended to assume that the visitor is ‘guilty until proven innocent’ (Mason, 2002). Such an approach has also tended to ignore the role of visitor experience in relation to visitor management. This paper critically evaluates a number of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ approaches to visitor management, focusing specifically on interpretation and codes of conduct in protected natural areas in New Zealand, Australia and Antarctica. It argues that the traditional approach of managing visitor impacts should be supported by a far greater emphasis on managing visitor experience. It proposes that placing emphasis on managing visitor experience should allow a more holistic perspective to be employed, in which the visitor can be put within a context that includes both the destination community and the environment visited. Such an approach, it is argued, should not only lead to better informed and behaved visitors, but a reduction in negative visitor impacts.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 105 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.