{"title":"National park entrance fees: A global benchmarking focussed on affordability","authors":"H. V. Zyl, J. Kinghorn, L. Emerton","doi":"10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1HVZ.EN","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Setting protected area entrance fees at appropriate levels can be extremely challenging. We provide benchmarking data across a sample of 62 countries and construct an Index of Affordability (IOA), showing protected area entry fees relative to citizens’ per capita income adjusted for purchasing power. Using this measure, Australian parks are the most affordable (IOA of 0.10) to citizens, those in Benin are the least affordable (10.69), while Indonesia is closest to the global average IOA of 2.09. Protected areas in low-income countries are on average 30 times less affordable to citizens than in high-income countries. This has equity implications, and may supress visitation rates, thereby reducing the degree to which citizens attach value to, and are willing to support, national parks. International tourist fees are lowest in Armenia (US$1.04) and highest in Tanzania (US$43.72), while Costa Rica is closest to the global average (US$11.21), a relatively small proportion of the US$165 average daily spend estimated for European middle to higher income tourists. International tourists to low-income countries pay an average entrance fee of US$20, four times that paid in high-income countries. This is arguably fair, given their far smaller protected area funding bases and much greater reliance on tourism earnings. Our findings support fee differentiation between citizens and international tourists as a means of equating affordability.","PeriodicalId":37571,"journal":{"name":"Parks","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Parks","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2019.PARKS-25-1HVZ.EN","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10
Abstract
Setting protected area entrance fees at appropriate levels can be extremely challenging. We provide benchmarking data across a sample of 62 countries and construct an Index of Affordability (IOA), showing protected area entry fees relative to citizens’ per capita income adjusted for purchasing power. Using this measure, Australian parks are the most affordable (IOA of 0.10) to citizens, those in Benin are the least affordable (10.69), while Indonesia is closest to the global average IOA of 2.09. Protected areas in low-income countries are on average 30 times less affordable to citizens than in high-income countries. This has equity implications, and may supress visitation rates, thereby reducing the degree to which citizens attach value to, and are willing to support, national parks. International tourist fees are lowest in Armenia (US$1.04) and highest in Tanzania (US$43.72), while Costa Rica is closest to the global average (US$11.21), a relatively small proportion of the US$165 average daily spend estimated for European middle to higher income tourists. International tourists to low-income countries pay an average entrance fee of US$20, four times that paid in high-income countries. This is arguably fair, given their far smaller protected area funding bases and much greater reliance on tourism earnings. Our findings support fee differentiation between citizens and international tourists as a means of equating affordability.
ParksEnvironmental Science-Nature and Landscape Conservation
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍:
We aim for PARKS to be a rigorous, challenging publication with high academic credibility and standing. But at the same time the journal is and should remain primarily a resource for people actively involved in establishing and managing protected areas, under any management category or governance type. We aim for the majority of papers accepted to include practical management information. We also work hard to include authors who are involved in management but do not usually find the time to report the results of their research and experience to a wider audience. We welcome submissions from people whose written English is imperfect as long as they have interesting research to report, backed up by firm evidence, and are happy to work with authors to develop papers for the journal. PARKS is published with the aim of strengthening international collaboration in protected area development and management by: • promoting understanding of the values and benefits derived from protected areas to governments, communities, visitors, business etc; • ensuring that protected areas fulfil their primary role in nature conservation while addressing critical issues such as ecologically sustainable development, social justice and climate change adaptation and mitigation; • serving as a leading global forum for the exchange of information on issues relating to protected areas, especially learning from case studies of applied ideas; • publishing articles reporting on recent applied research that is relevant to protected area management; • changing and improving protected area management, policy environment and socio-economic benefits through use of information provided in the journal; and • promoting IUCN’s work on protected areas.