report on the economic impact of the...

The Economic Impact of the Environment for Growth (E4G) Programme

Report for:

Cadw/Natural Resources Wales/Visit Wales/Welsh Government, February 11th 2016

From:

Cardiff Business SchoolColum Drive

Cardiff CF10 3EU

Contact:Prof Max Munday

Email: [email protected]: 02920 876042

Authors:Prof Max MundayProf Calvin Jones

Neil Roche

REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE ENVIRONMENT FOR GROWTH (E4G) PROGRAMME

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Acronyms 4Executive Summary 5

Section 1 The Monitoring and Evaluation of the Environment for Growth (E4G) Programme 9

1.1 Introduction 91.2 Monitoring and Evaluation of the Environment for Growth Strategic

Projects 91.3 Objectives of the Report 101.4 Structure of the Report 11

Section 2 Methodology 122.1 Sources of Economic Impact 122.2 Direct and Indirect Economic Impacts 132.3 Economic Impact Measurement Indicators 132.4 Input Output Tables 142.5 Summary of Approach 142.6 Data Sources 152.7 Estimating Regional Impacts 17

Section 3 Communities and Nature Strategic Project 183.1 Introduction 193.2 Scope of CAN E4G initiatives 203.3 Economic Impact Visitor Surveys carried out as part of the CAN project 213.4 Economic Impact of CAN initiatives carrying out a visitor survey 223.5 Economic Impact of CAN site initiatives that did not carry out a survey 263.6 Summary of the Economic Impact of Visitor Spending at CAN initiatives 273.7 The Economic Impact of Communities and Nature Project Capital Spending 283.8 Conclusion 29

Section 4 Coastal Tourism Project Strategic Project 314.1 Introduction 324.2 Scope of the Coastal Tourism E4G Project 324.3 Economic Impact Visitor Surveys carried out as part of the CT E4G Project 334.4 Economic Impact of CT site initiatives carrying out a visitor survey 334.5 Economic Impact of CT site initiatives that did not carry out a survey 374.6 Summary of the Economic Impact of Visitor Spending at CT Sites 374.7 Other Impacts: The Green Sea Project 384.8 The Economic Impact of Coastal Tourism Project Capital Spend 424.9 Coastal Tourism Project WEFO Outputs 43

Section 5 Heritage Tourism Project Strategic Project 445.1 Introduction 455.2 Scope of HTP E4G initiatives 455.3 Economic Impact Visitor Surveys carried out as part of the HTP E4G project 475.4 Economic Impact of HTP site initiatives carrying out a visitor survey 48

2

5.5 Economic Impact of HTP site initiatives that did not carry out a survey 535.6 Summary of the Economic Impact of Visitor Spending at HTP initiatives 535.7 The Economic Impact of Heritage Tourism Project Capital Spend 54

Section 6 Sustainable Tourism Strategic Project 566.1 Introduction 576.2 Scope of the Sustainable Tourism E4G Project 576.3 Economic Impact Visitor Surveys carried out as part of the ST E4G Project 586.4 Economic Impact of ST site initiatives carrying out a visitor survey 586.5 Economic Impact of ST site initiatives that did not carry out a survey 616.6 Summary of the Economic Impact of Visitor Spending at Sustainable

Tourism Centres of Excellence 616.7 Economic Impact of Visitor Spending at Events 626.8 The Economic Impact of Sustainable Tourism Project Capital Spend 646.9 Sustainable Tourism Project WEFO Outputs 65

Section 7 Valleys Regional Park Strategic Project 667.1 Introduction 677.2 Scope of VRP E4G initiatives 677.3 Economic Impact Visitor Surveys carried out as part of the VRP E4G project 697.4 Economic Impact of VRP site initiatives carrying out a visitor survey 697.5 Economic Impact of VRP site initiatives that did not carry out a survey 737.6 Summary of the Economic Impact of Visitor Spending at VRP initiatives 747.7 Economic Impact of Visitor Spending at Events 747.8 Connected Notable Aspects of the VRP Programme 767.9 The Economic Impact of Valleys Regional Park Project Capital Spend 777.10 Interpretation Initiatives 78

Section 8 Wales Coast Path Strategic Project 808.1 Introduction 818.2 Scope of the Wales Coast Path E4G Convergence Area 818.3 Data Sources 828.4 Visitor Spending Economic Impact Results 838.5 The Economic Impact of Wales Coast Path Capital Spending 86

Section 9 Conclusions 889.1 In Summary: The Economic Impact of E4G 889.2 The Uses and Limits of Economic Modelling 919.3 Engaging Stakeholders 919.4 Concluding Remarks 92

3

LIST OF ACRONYMS

B&B Bed and Breakfast (accommodation)BNPT Bridgend and Neath Port TalbotBTCV British Trust of Conservation VolunteersCAN Communities and NatureCBC County Borough CouncilCC County CouncilCCW Countryside Council for Wales (now NRW)CIC Community Interest CompanyCoE Centre of ExcellenceCT Coastal TourismE4G Environment for GrowthERDF European Regional Development FundEU European UnionFTE Full Time Equivalent (jobs)GVA Gross Value AddedHTP Heritage Tourism ProjectKm KilometreM&E Monitoring and EvaluationN&NW North and north west (Green Sea)NRW Natural Resources WalesNWWT North Wales Wildlife TrustOHG One Historic GardenRSPB Royal Society for the Protection of BirdsTDGVA Total Direct Gross Value AddedTIM Tourism Impact ModelTSA Tourism Satellite AccountS&SW South and south west (Green Sea)ST Sustainable TourismVRP Valleys Regional ParkWCP Wales Coast PathWEFO Welsh European Funding OfficeWERU Welsh Economy Research Unit (Cardiff University)

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

The following summarises the project completion report findings on the economic impact of the Environment for Growth (E4G) tourism programme in Wales. The economic impact of both visitor spending (to September 2015) and capital spending (to project end) are detailed for each of the six E4G strategic projects. Economic impacts are reported in terms of gross value added and employment.

Table A1: Economic Impact IndicatorsEconomic Measure Description

Gross Value Added (GVA) Locally earned incomes and profits. Reported in £s.

Employment The number of person years of employment (Full-Time Equivalent FTE) supported by spending associated with visits to E4G sites or events.

MAIN FINDINGS

Visitor spending economic impact Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending with E4G

initiative sites it is estimated that in total they could be connected with impacts of £51.8m of gross value added (GVA) per year and with this supporting employment of around 2,611 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

Capital spending economic impact Total estimated construction expenditure associated with the E4G strategic projects was

£72.79m. Taking a mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing it is estimated that, once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account, that some £52.5m of value added is supported in Wales and around 1,225 jobs.

5

BACKGROUND

The overarching purpose of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work is to better understand the economic effects levered by improvements to E4G sites, visitation to E4G sponsored events, and capital spending. The estimation of the economic impact of the E4G strategic projects covered the period from November 2009 to September 2015.

The economic impacts that are attributable to the E4G programme take place largely away from the visitor sites themselves (e.g. spending occurs in shops and on accommodation etc. in local towns). The analysis therefore looked at all trip related spending whether at the site or directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors).

Details of the 6 strategic projects within the E4G programme in Wales were included in the analysis. A total of 85 visitor surveys were carried out; with a combined 12,125 individual questionnaires completed (Table A2).

Table A2: Surveys and responses by E4G Strategic Project

E4G Strategic Project Number of surveys

Number of questionnaires

Communities and Nature(CAN) 14 2,589Coastal Tourism (CT) 12 1,146Heritage Tourism Project (HTP) 28 3,830Sustainable Tourism (ST) 11 1,261Valleys Regional Park (VRP) 18 1,733Wales Coast Path (WCP) 2 1,566

All E4G 85 12,125

Visitor volume estimates were combined with data from the visitor surveys and estimates of the indirect impacts of visitors spending to provide a gauge of individual initiatives’ overall economic impact.

For sites where surveys were not undertaken estimations of their economic impact were derived. Average spends and economic impact details were taken from similar sites that had been surveyed and an average figure applied to the non-surveyed site annual visitor number to generate economic impacts.

For the overall E4G programme data collected from six E4G Strategic Projects (via e-flyers) Table A3 indicates the total initial level of external and leveraged investment. There was an

6

estimated total investment spend associated with the strategic projects of £90.6m, of which £39.3m represents ERDF support and with an average intervention rate of 43.4%.

Table A3: Summary of Initial Investment in E4G Strategic Projects

Strategic Project Number of Initiatives1,2

Total Value of Initiative Spend

(£m)

Value of ERDF grant aid

(£m)

Communities and Nature (CAN) 61 12.5 4.9Coastal Tourism Project (CT) 5 18.8 8.7Heritage Tourism Project (HTP) 25 17.0 7.6Sustainable Tourism Project (ST) 4 18.9 8.2Valleys Regional Park (VRP) 48 14.7 6.0Wales Coast Path (WCP Convergence Area) 10 8.7 3.9

All E4G 153 90.6 39.3NOTE 1: Centre of Excellence or Project for CT; Centre of Excellence for ST; Local Authority for WCP.NOTE 2: Number of initiatives includes those that did not return an e-flyer.

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VISITOR SPENDING

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending with initiative sites it is estimated that in total they could be connected with impacts of £51.8m of gross value added (GVA) per year and with this supporting employment of around 2,611 full-time equivalents (FTEs). (Table A4).

Table A4: Annual Site Economic Impact by E4G Strategic Project

7

E4G Strategic Project GVA (£s) generated

Employment (FTEs)

supported by site visitor

spending

Communities and Nature 5,829,000 313Coastal Tourism 8,118,000 399Heritage Tourism Project 19,363,000 1,045Sustainable Tourism 4,932,000 232Valleys Regional Park 1,736,000 87Wales Coast Path (Convergence) 11,800,000 535All E4G 51,778,000 2,611

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CAPITAL SPENDING

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending the E4G programme has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending (construction type activity). Total estimated construction expenditure associated with the E4G strategic projects was £72.79m. Taking a mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing it is estimated that, once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account, that some £52.5m of value added is supported in Wales and around 1,225 jobs.

Table A5: Estimated Value Added and Employment Supported by E4G Capital Spending at Project CompletionProject and Local sourcing assumption Value Added (£m) Approx Employment

(FTE person years)*

Communities and Nature Whole project (£8.134m)100% 7.4 170

80% 5.8 13560% 4.4 100

Coastal Tourism Whole project (£14.813m)100% 13.3 320

80% 10.7 25560% 8.0 190

Heritage Tourism Project Whole project (£15.900m)100% 14.3 335

80% 11.4 27060% 8.6 200

Sustainable Tourism Whole project (£13.724m)100% 12.4 290

80% 9.9 23060% 7.4 175

Valleys Regional Park Whole project (£14.200m)100% 12.8 300

80% 10.3 24060% 7.7 175

Wales Coast Path Whole project (£6.015m)100% 5.4 125

80% 4.4 9560% 3.3 75

Total Whole project (£72.786m)100% 65.6 1540

80% 52.5 122560% 39.4 915

Note 1: The employment estimate numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5.1. THE MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT FOR GROWTH (E4G) PROGRAMME

8

1.1 INTRODUCTION

In the 2007-13 round of European Convergence Funding for West Wales and the Valleys, over 150 initiatives related to the visitor economy in Wales received funding under the “Environment for Growth” theme of the (Priority 4, theme 3) of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

E4G comprises six strategic projects, managed by Welsh Government, Visit Wales, CADW and Natural Resources Wales. The six strategic E4G projects are: Coastal Tourism; Communities and Nature; Heritage Tourism; Sustainable Tourism; Valleys Regional Park; and Wales Coast Path.

1.2 MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT FOR GROWTH STRATEGIC PROJECTS

There is a requirement that projects and sites supported by ERDF funding provide evidence that the resources have been used appropriately; that projected impacts have been achieved; and that fundamental ‘good management’ practices have been followed (for example with respect to the cross cutting themes of equal opportunities and environmental sustainability). Estimating the economic impact of visitor sites, however, presents distinct challenges. Many of the important impacts of visitation will not occur ‘onsite’ or directly because of the activity, but more widely throughout the regional economy as visitors spend money on accommodation and other services away from the destination in question; meanwhile, sites themselves will have impacts away from their immediate location through their purchases of goods and labour.

Projects under E4G were subject to common monitoring and evaluation procedures with the aim of providing cost savings and a better understanding of the economic, social and environmental benefits of individual initiatives; the six strategic projects; and E4G as a whole.

As part of this monitoring and evaluation approach Cardiff University (Welsh Economy Research Unit) was contracted to provide a central management service to help evaluate economic impacts in Wales. The Cardiff team provided a set of monitoring forms to be completed by initiatives to fulfil WEFO and Assembly requirements; a monitoring and evaluation guidance pack; off-site workshop days for initiative managers and other stakeholders; a central website offering advice and useful materials; and centralised data analysis and reporting (including summary reports for individual sites). This evaluation activity was complementary to the core monitoring requirements undertaken for WEFO grant purposes.

1.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE REPORT

9

The overarching purpose of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work is to better understand the economic effects levered by both improvements to E4G sites, and visitation to E4G sponsored events. This report covers the estimation of the economic impact of the E4G programme from November 2009 to September 2015.

It presents economic impact assessments of visitation to sites that were subject to visitor surveys and, where possible, indicates the estimated economic impact at non-surveyed sites using data collected at other similar initiatives within the overall E4G project as a proxy. Furthermore, estimates of economic impact are given for the capital spending associated with the programme.

This report follows two interim progress reports on the wider E4G project covering the periods November 2009 to April 2010, and then in the period to March 2011. It also follows the Mid Term Report covering progress from November 2009 to February 2012. For background on the procedures and process of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work these earlier commentaries should be read in conjunction with this report.

The objectives of the monitoring and evaluation project commissioned by the E4G project partners required that Cardiff University would:

• Work with Strategic E4G Project managers to implement the E4G monitoring and evaluation framework majoring on the economic effects of levered visitation;

• Develop the E4G monitoring and evaluation framework using feedback from partners and site managers;

• Deliver workshops on monitoring and evaluation measurement techniques around the Convergence Fund area;

• Develop and assist in the application of a system to collect the appropriate monitoring and evaluation information from E4G sites/projects and/or bid partners as appropriate, including developing a process for the electronic submission of visitor survey data;

• Develop a meta-analysis of sites, in order to focus survey resources on a sample of representative sites;

• Mentor project managers at sampled sites as appropriate;• Analyse the collated monitoring data, and report information in short reports and

datasheets to project sponsors and stakeholders at site and aggregate level; • Create and maintain a website for E4G partners to provide access to information on

M&E tools, approaches and ‘best practice’, and include a stakeholder discussion forum.

10

This report concentrates on the penultimate point above, describing the monitoring and evaluation work overseen by Cardiff Business School and setting out the findings from the analysis of data received from each of the E4G strategic projects.

The economic impact is reported in terms of output, gross value added and employment arising directly, and indirectly, through the spending in Wales of visitors to initiatives covered by E4G. In order to estimate the impact of visitor direct spending and capital spending the Welsh Economy Research Unit’s Welsh Input-Output Tables were used.

Input Output tables provide a detailed financial account of trading between different parts of the economy during one year. This includes trade between industries within the economy, external trade through imports and exports, as well as consumer and government spending. The Input Output framework then enables the effect of any spending or activity to be traced through the various supply chains, ultimately estimating indirect and induced-income effects.

1.4 STRUCTURE OF REPORT

Section 2 outlines the methodology used in estimating the economic impacts of E4G sites and events. Sections 3 to 8 aggregate the visitor survey information for each strategic project and present the estimates of economic impact associated with visitor spending at surveyed and non-surveyed initiatives. The individual strategic project chapters also include estimates for the economic impact of capital spending. Section 9 presents the conclusions from the analysis.

11

2. METHOD

2.1 SOURCES OF ECONOMIC IMPACT

When estimating the economic impact of visitor sites and events it is important to be aware that much of the economic impact may arise away from the destination (e.g. a relatively high proportion of visitor spending takes place in shops and hotels in nearby towns, not at the destination itself). Furthermore, sites themselves will have impacts off site through their purchases of goods and labour.

As E4G visitors spend their money in the wider Convergence region away from E4G sites many E4G-related jobs will be created ‘indirectly’. In order to understand whether the substantial regional match-funding allocated under this EU priority is justified, these impacts must be evaluated, requiring an overall understanding of visitors’ characteristics and behaviour. Visitor surveys requested at a sample of sites and events by the research team had the aim of supplying this understanding as their goal. With relatively high numbers of returns it is possible to come to conclusions on the types of initiatives expected to have the greatest visitor economy effects.

Visitor surveys were not undertaken at every site and event. For small or unmanned sites, undertaking visitor surveys in order to reveal visitor characteristics or behaviour is impractical. For example, for very small sites, the effort involved in interviewing a sufficient sample of visitors to provide statistically robust estimates of expenditure would be wholly disproportionate to the usefulness of the data collected. It is possible though, and in some cases necessary, to assume that impact per visitor is comparable between similar sites or visitors within an area. Here we measure visitor volumes, and then assume characteristics and behaviour are in line with those reported at other similar or proximate initiatives. To assist with this, a typology of sites was produced, categorising locations by a number of activities.

The E4G framework required that inference be drawn from visitor survey information at a sample of sites to the whole population, whether by strategic project or for the whole E4G project. To make this process work it was critical that the Cardiff University team have visitor numbers associated with E4G sites and events that were not covered by surveys. The aspiration at the start of the E4G monitoring and evaluation process was for the six strategic projects to gain around 1,000 completed questionnaires in each of two separate calendar years (the target for the Wales Coast Path project was half this).

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending it is important to recognise that the Environment for Growth programme has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending, in large measure on construction type activity. All project activity has taken place within the Convergence Area of Wales, thus employment and incomes supported in construction could have

12

important local effects. The following analysis relates the effects of levered visitation to the capital expended in making site improvements or in developing events.

2.2 DIRECT AND INDIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACTS

The assessment of the economic impacts of spending by visitors to E4G sites and events in Wales needs to take place at two discrete levels. There is a need to first estimate the direct economic impact of this expenditure in the region, as visitors purchase food and drink, pay for parking and meet accommodation costs etc.

However, the estimate of direct effects only provides a partial estimate of impact. There is also a need to consider how the visitor spending supports economic activity in Wales indirectly. Expenditure by visitors requires outputs from other Welsh industries, so that as, for example, visitors stay in local B&B’s/Guesthouses, purchases are made by the accommodation providers from local farms or wholesalers to provide breakfasts. This regional sourcing then in turn leads to further regional spending by the local farms, and so on. The extent of these supplier effects then depends on the level of Welsh sourcing for the particular sector and on levels of regional sourcing by its suppliers. Additionally, visitor spending adds to local incomes, a large part of which will likely be spent in the region, further adding to local incomes. These induced-income effects can be added to supplier effects to form the total indirect consequences of the direct local economic activities.

2.3 ECONOMIC IMPACT MEASUREMENT INDICATORS

Economic impacts, levered by visitors to E4G sites and events, can be expressed in terms of spending, incomes and jobs, or in economic terms- Output, Gross Value Added and Employment (see Table 2.1).

Table 2.1: Economic Impact IndicatorsEconomic Measure DescriptionOutput The value of the goods and services produced in the local economy as a

result of the increase in visitor expenditure due to the E4G initiativesGross Value Added (GVA) Locally earned incomes and profits, and part of taxes on economic activity

Employment The number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) jobs supported by spending associated with the E4G initiatives

To estimate the indirect economic impacts it is necessary to have a model of the Welsh economy which shows how different types of consumption spending create supplier and induced-income effects across different sectors of the Welsh economy. The Input-Output tables for Wales provide such a framework.

13

It is important to note that the employment figures mentioned in this report are not the same as the WEFO defined “additional jobs” used in measuring project outputs. Employment as defined in this report includes both the direct and indirect activity supported by project spending (both visitor expenditure and capital spend).

2.4 INPUT OUTPUT TABLES

The most recent Input Output Tables for Wales were produced by the Welsh Economy Research Unit with support from the Environment Agency Wales (July 2010). For more details please visit: http://business.cardiff.ac.uk/research/groups/welsh-economy-research-unit

In addition to the Input-Output tables the analysis also used the Tourism Satellite Account (TSA) for Wales 2010 (produced by Cardiff University for Visit Wales in 2013). Using this tool, further analysis was possible on aspects of tourism’s economic significance. The TSA provided a wealth of information on tourism’s direct economic importance to Wales, including an employment module detailing how tourism directly supports Welsh employment. The TSA allows the estimation of Tourism Direct Gross Value Added (TDGVA). This variable shows how much of the gross value added (GVA) created in Wales is as a result of tourists’ spending before, during or after trips to Wales.

Cardiff University has undertaken additional work to develop a modelling structure from the Welsh TSA linking to the Input-Output framework described above. This is known as the Tourism Impact Model for Wales (TIM) and it is from this model that the impact figures are derived.

2.5 SUMMARY OF APPROACH

Figure 2.1 provides a summary of the economic impact estimation approach. Here, the direct spending of visitors to E4G initiatives is used within the framework of the Input-Output tables for Wales and the Tourism Impact Model for Wales to estimate indirect supplier and induced income effects.

14

‘Multiplier’ Effects

Gross E4G visitor related expenditure in

Wales

INPUT-OUTPUT TABLES for Wales

Supplier Effects Economic ImpactOutput

GVAEmployment

Induced Income Effects

Leakages (taxes, imports etc.)

Figure 2.1 Estimation of Net Economic Impact in Wales

2.6 DATA SOURCES

Visitor volume estimates were combined with data from visitor surveys and modelling of the indirect impacts of visitor spending to provide a gauge of individual initiatives’ overall economic impact.

Estimates of visit numbers to E4G sites and events were supplied by those running the various initiatives (such as Local Authorities, National Parks and environmental charities). These were collected through a variety of means including automatic people counters; ticket sales; and manual survey counts.

The visitor surveys, which were also carried out by selected initiatives, provided data on expenditures, type of visit (day-trip or overnight), and accommodation used.

Figure 2.2 Data Sources to Inform Direct Economic Effects of Visitation to E4G Initiatives

+

The evaluation was set up to meet WEFO requirements, where outputs are number of visitors and numbers of jobs, with no requirement to count additional visits. The research team did ask initiatives to supply ‘baseline’ visitor number data from the pre-project period as useful extra information (particularly to help inform discussion on project additionality), but data returns here were sparse.

15

Visitor Volume Data

Visitor data requested for every initiative was:

1. Baseline annual visitor count (if available)

2. Annual visitor count post any E4G works

Visitor Surveys

A sample of E4G sites and events were requested to carry out a standard E4G visitor survey.

In the six E4G Strategic Projects there were over 80 separate surveys carried out with around 12,000 individual questionnaires completed

The evaluation of the E4G investment intended to provide information that was both regionally and locally relevant. Where E4G sites or events did not carry out visitor surveys, but visitor numbers were able to be supplied, estimates of the economic impact were made, where possible, by using proxy data on spending from similar E4G locations. Each supported initiative or event was classified into one or more specific (lower level) typology designations. In each case up to three designations were applied (Table 2.2).

Table 2.2: Typology of E4G InitiativesHigh level designation Lower level designations1. Route, link or connection 1.1. Cycle route

1.2 Walking trail1.3 Bridleway1.4 Other route or link

2. Museum, gallery or heritage centre 2.1 Museum of industrial heritage2.2 Museum of history/culture2.3 Local/Community museum

3. Industrial heritage sites/activity 3.1 House and/or gardens3.2 Coal3.3 Metal industries3.4 Maritime3.5 Other industrial heritage

4. Non-industrial Heritage site/activity 4.1 Medieval4.2 Roman & prehistoric4.3 Defence of the Realm4.4 Linguistic Heritage4.5 Rural heritage4.6 Other non-industrial heritage

5. Natural Heritage Sites & reserves 5.1 Country Park/visitor centre5.2 Woodland or forest5.3 Hill, mountains or moorland5.4 Wetland5.5 River, canal or stream5.6 Beach5.7 Other coastal site5.8 Designated natural reserve

6. Activity Tourism 6.1 Family activities6.2 Cycling6.3 Walking6.4 Riding6.5 Extreme sports

7. Events 7.1 Popular culture events7.2 Heritage events7.3 Community events7.4 Nature & countryside events7.5 Other event

8. Non-spatial project 8.1 Interpretation and presentation8.2 Guiding8.3 Informal Training, coaching & skills development8.4 Dissemination & reporting

16

For example, information on the characteristics of visitors to industrial heritage sites gleaned from E4G surveys can be applied to sites with no relevant survey information (but with relevant volume counts) to provide indicative information on economic and environmental impact – albeit with the proviso that there is an expectation that visitor characteristics are determined by the type of site they visit.

2.7 ESTIMATING REGIONAL IMPACTS

Over the evaluation period, some 12,000 visitor questionnaires have been collected for the E4G project as a whole, including both characteristics and expenditure details. The potential improvement to understanding the regional impact of the E4G sites (and indeed tourism as a whole) is significant. We cannot, however, simply aggregate all the expenditure of E4G visitors on trips to Wales and use this to estimate economic (or indeed environmental) impact. Key issues here are double counting and additionality. An individual survey respondent to an E4G survey may only in part be motivated to visit the region because of that specific attraction – or indeed may visit more than one attraction during the same regional trip. Counting whole-trip impact would thus overestimate the impact of E4G sites and attractions. In order to avoid this, the evaluation process allocates a single day’s impact (including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors) to an E4G visit. This softens the assumption on the motivation of the trip, now assuming only that the visit to the E4G site is the main motivator for that day’s activities. Information gathered on the length of time spent at the site, and on multi-destination trips, was used to test the reasonableness of this assumption.

Displacement also serves to lower the net additional impact of the EU supported activity. For tourism in this regional context, displacement largely refers to how far E4G visitors have been attracted away from other Welsh attractions – and if this is the case, it offers little additional economic impact. It is difficult to adjust the questionnaire returns to account for this element; it is thus accepted that there will be some displacement from other Welsh sites.

A similar issue arises with respect to the ‘additionality’ of EU funding – i.e. the extent to which projects might have gone ahead without the EU funding intervention; such an assessment is outside the scope of this research project.

17

3. COMMUNITIES AND NATURE STRATEGIC PROJECT

COMMUNITIES AND NATURE SUMMARY

The overarching purpose of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work is to better understand the economic effects levered both by improvements to E4G sites, and by visitation to E4G sponsored events. This section estimates the economic impact of the E4G Communities and Nature (CAN) strategic project from November 2009 to August 2014.

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending with initiative sites it is estimated that in total they could be connected with impacts of £5,829,000 of gross value added (GVA) per year and with this supporting employment of 313 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

o Surveyed sites: GVA £4,434,400 per year; 239 FTEso Non-surveyed sites estimate: GVA £1,394,600 per year; 74 FTEs

Total estimated construction expenditure associated with the CAN project was £8.1m. Taking a mid-range estimate of 80% Welsh sourcing it is estimated that, once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account, that some £5.8m of value added is supported in Wales and around 135 jobs.

The economic impacts that are attributable to the CAN programme take place largely away from the visitor sites themselves (e.g. spending occurs in shops and on accommodation etc. in local towns). The analysis therefore looked at all trip related spending whether at, or away from the visitor sites.

18

3.1 INTRODUCTION

This section reports the estimated economic impact of spending arising from visitation to individual CAN sites surveyed during the E4G programme. Economic impact estimates are provided for initiatives that were not surveyed but for which annual visitor numbers were submitted to the Cardiff research team. Here proxy data on spending from similar E4G initiatives was incorporated.

The primary aim of the Communities and Nature (CAN) strategic project was to generate increased economic growth and sustainable jobs by capitalising on Wales’ environmental qualities, particularly its landscape and wildlife; this was described as ‘Aim A’ of the project. Further aims and objectives, not studied here, relate to ensuring that the benefits of initiative activities are shared with disadvantaged groups (Aim B) and providing high quality local leisure opportunities and improving the attractiveness of each spatial plan area (Aim C)1.

Managed by Natural Resources Wales (NRW), CAN was implemented via three strands: Three initiatives delivered by NRW; A separate NRW project to improve access and habitat at river and still water fisheries, giving

anglers more access to wild fishing (Wild Fishing Wales). This comprised of 36 separate initiatives; and

A suite of 22 initiatives managed by other organisations and delivering various facilities and footpaths for visitors seeking to enjoy the natural environment.

A wide range of activities have been funded including: Building and improving facilities at sites including exhibition centres, car-parks, toilets, shops and

tea-rooms; Development and installation of interpretation materials; Building and improvement of paths; Provision of way markings on paths; Improving cycle routes and multi-use routes; and Marketing of sites and activities.

1 See Wavehill Report (2014): Evaluation of the Communities and Nature Project (CAN): social and community objectives.

19

Table 3.1 Communities and Nature: Outputs and Results – predicted and achievedGross Jobs

Initiatives to improve the

environment

Number of associated

jobs

Number of new jobs

Number of enterprises

created

Number of visits

Km of access created & improved

Predicted 20 20 3 100,000 10

Achieved 61 11.49 21.05 11 1,791,147 440.69Source: NRW

3.2 SCOPE OF CAN E4G INITIATIVES

At the start of the monitoring and evaluation process for E4G, the WERU research team designed the “e-flyer” as a means of gathering basic information from initiatives. This provided an insight into the breadth of activity being undertaken, the time-scales associated with projects and their spending (with subdivisions for matched funding and ERDF elements) and details of the expected outputs from the projects.

The overarching project data also provided the evaluators with information used to develop typologies of initiatives, and to inform the numbers of initiatives which required more detailed surveys on top of simple volume counts. Table 3.2 lists the 61 initiatives that returned e-flyers for the CAN E4G strategic project (Wild Fishing Wales comprised 36 initiatives in itself).

Table 3.2 List of CAN Initiatives (e-flyers received)Partner Organisation Initiative TitlePEMBROKESHIRE CC Westfield Pill Access RouteNORTH WALES WILDLIFE TRUST Natur I BawbMONTGOMERYSHIRE WILDLIFE TRUST 1 Dyfi OspreysGROUNDWORK BNPT Lloughor Green WaysSWANSEA CC Swansea’s Nature NetworkBTCV 1 Llys NiniBTCV 2 Pembrey & CarmelGREENLINKS Upton Woodland SchemeDENBIGHSHIRE DEE VALLEY Dee Valley Rivers and Railways Project

BRIDGEND CBC Access Improvements- Ewenny Moors and Heronston Lane

GWYNEDD CC Lon Las OgwenPLAS GWYN Y WEDDW Menter y WinllanMONTGOMERYSHIRE WILDLIFE TRUST 2 Dyfi Ospreys – Bird ObservatoryRSPB Conwy ConnectionsPEMBROKESHIRE MENCAP Stackpole Gardens

CONWY & DENBIGHSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL Conwy/ Denbighshire Country Parks and Nature Reserves Improvement Programme

20

CCW (now NRW) YstradlynCCW (now NRW) Cwm IdwalCCW (now NRW) Darganfod Dyfi Explore DyfiENVIRONMENT AGENCY WALES (now NRW) Wild Fishing Wales (contains 36 initiatives)KEEP WALES TIDY Green Links on Holy IslandSNOWDONIA SOCIETY Ty Hyll Welsh Honey Bee InitiativeSOUTH & WEST WALES WILDLIFE TRUST Wildlife, Wicker and WalksSNOWDONIA NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY Rhyd Ddu – Beddgelert Multi User Link PathFELIN UCHAF Visitor and Community CentreFORESTRY COMMISSION (now NRW) Newborough Recreation Development

For the 61 initiatives of which the research team have data for, Table 3.3 indicates the total initial level of external and leveraged investment. Table 3.3 shows that there was an estimated total spend associated with these initiatives of around £12.5m, of which £4.9m represents ERDF support, and with an average intervention rate of 39%. The average expenditure associated with a CAN E4G initiative is £205,000.

Table 3.3 Summary of Communities and Nature Initiatives from E-Flyer ReturnsNumber of Initiatives


(£millions)


(£millions)CAN 61 12.5 4.9

3.3 ECONOMIC IMPACT VISITOR SURVEYS CARRIED OUT AS PART OF THE CAN E4G PROJECT

Table 3.4 shows the 14 E4G visitor surveys that were carried out by Communities and Nature initiatives. A total of 2,589 questionnaires were completed at 10 different sites.

Table 3.4 CAN Visitor Surveys undertaken

21


completed

Site or Event survey?

Ystradlyn Cadair Idris 2011 179 SiteCors Dyfi Ospreys 2011 530 SiteGreat Orme 2011 163 SiteStackpole Gardens 20121 103 SiteYstradlyn 20122 45 SiteGreat Orme 2012 181 SiteYstradlyn 2013 210 SiteTy Hyll 2013 204 SiteCwm Idwal 2013 250 SiteRSPB Conwy Connections 2013 200 SiteNewborough Forest 2013 182 SiteUpton Castle Gardens 20143 32 SiteStackpole Gardens 2014 144 SiteThe Welsh Wildlife Centre Cilgerran 2014 166 Site

2,589NOTE 1: No spend data was collected at Stackpole 2012 so an economic impact estimate was not possible.NOTE 2: The site sample size for Ystradlyn 2012 was too small to attempt an economic impact assessment (collected questionnaires were held as a back-up ‘booster’ for later survey).NOTE 3: The site sample size for Upton Gardens 2014 was too small to attempt an economic impact assessment.

3.4 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CAN INITIATIVES CARRYING OUT A VISITOR SURVEY

Table 3.5 provides an overview of economic impact associated with visitation to sites. In developing the estimates in these tables it was necessary to gross up the information in the visitor surveys to the overall visitor numbers at each site over a year or season as appropriate. Clearly the accuracy of the estimates relies heavily on the representativeness of the surveys collected, with smaller numbers of surveys having to be considered more carefully. The information on tourism spending at the sites becomes an input into the framework of the Tourism Impact Planning Model for Wales developed for Visit Wales by Cardiff University. This economic model generates an estimate of the gross value added and employment connected to the tourist visits.

The economic impact information in Table 3.5 is presented in two panels. The first panel provides an estimate of the economic impact of the total trip per visitor. So, for example the visit to a CAN site might only take up one day of a three day visit. However, we account for the economic impact associated with the whole trip. The CAN site clearly represents just part of the visit but it is important to consider the type and impact of tourism in Wales that E4G is helping to lever. The second panel provides an estimate of the economic effects associated with the visit to the CAN site itself and is classified as an on-site impact. These are the effects associated with visitor spending at

22

the site, and those directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors). Where visitors to E4G sites visited more than one initiative on their trip on a particular day, or were surveyed on their way to a site or event, then there is the possibility of double-counting their economic impact. However, after examining data on wider trip characteristics and the length of time spent at one E4G site, in the case of the Communities and Nature initiatives we do not believe that the magnitude of error caused is significant.

The economic impact is reported in terms of gross value added and supported employment. It is important to note that the employment estimates in the second panel do not link directly to full time equivalent employment at the respective sites. Rather the economic impact tables reveal the direct and indirect employment impacts associated with the tourism spending as a whole. For example this reflects the amount of annual full-time equivalent (FTE) employment supported per £ of different types of tourism spending in Wales for a given year.

There are a number of determinants of the scale of economic impacts at site and trip level. This reflects differences in spending patterns for day trips as opposed to staying visitation, and then precisely what tourists spend money on. In the case of on-site economic effects this is inevitably determined by the supply side around sites and events. Some CAN sites offer few opportunities to purchase goods and services often because they wish to preserve from further development the very environment that people have come to visit and enjoy. For these reasons care needs to be exercised in comparing sites on the economic impact numbers. Smaller on-site impacts may not be a bad news story.

23

Table 3.5 Communities and Nature –SITE Surveys Economic Impact

Ystradlyn 2011

Cors Dyfi Ospreys

2011Great Orme

2011Great Orme

2012Ystradlyn

2013Ty Hyll

2013Cwm Idwal

2013

Conwy Connections

2013Newborough Forest 2013

Stackpole 2014

Cilgerran 2014

Site average

Vis itor Numbers 35,000 40,000 145,183 186,448 34,000 30,000 71,700 78,000 49,300 13,954 14,815 63,491

DateOct'10-Sep'11

Jan'11-Dec'11

Jan'11-Dec'11

Jan'12- Dec'12

Jan'13- Dec'13

Jan'13- Dec'13

Mar'11- Feb'12

Dec'12- Nov'13

Jan'13- Dec'13

Jan'13- Dec'13

Jan'13- Dec'13

Questionnai res completed 179 530 163 181 210 204 250 200 182 144 166 219 Number in respondents ' parties 603 1,513 599 721 745 626 1,049 430 546 300 350 680 Staying away from home in Wales 65.5% 62.2% 82.6% 80.1% 74.8% 73.0% 52.2% 16.1% 43.0% 46.9% 46.9% 58.5%

Economic ImpactTotal TripGross Value Added £1,876,000 £2,150,000 £8,245,000 £10,289,000 £2,475,000 £2,192,000 £2,657,000 £1,472,800 £2,053,600 £667,000 £708,300 £3,162,336Supported employment - FTE 84.0 95.0 370.0 460.0 110.0 98.0 120.0 66.0 92.0 30.0 32.0 141.5 GVA to create each job £22,333 £22,632 £22,284 £22,367 £22,500 £22,367 £22,142 £22,315 £22,322 £22,233 £22,134 £22,341Trips to create job 417 421 392 405 309 306 598 1,182 536 465 463 448.6Total trip GVA per vis i tor £53.60 £53.75 £56.79 £55.18 £72.79 £73.07 £37.06 £18.88 £41.66 £47.80 £47.81 49.81

Directly attributable to s i teGross Value Added £276,000 £180,400 £2,271,000 £2,320,000 £412,600 £569,000 £393,700 £356,200 £94,400 £45,800 £62,300 £698,140Employment FTEs 15.0 9.6 95.0 125.0 22.7 31.0 22.2 19.2 4.3 2.1 2.9 34.9GVA to create each job £18,400 £18,792 £23,905 £18,560 £18,176 £18,355 £17,734 £18,552 £21,953 £21,810 £21,483 £20,004Vis its to create job 2,333 4,167 1,528 1,492 1,498 968 3,230 4,063 11,465 6,645 5,109 1819On-s ite GVA per vis i tor £7.89 £4.51 £15.64 £12.44 £12.14 £18.97 £5.49 £4.57 £1.91 £3.28 £4.21 £11.00

GVA per vis i tor (total trip: on-s ite) 6.80 11.92 3.63 4.43 6.00 3.85 6.75 4.13 21.75 14.56 11.37 4.53GVA to create job (tota l trip: on-s i te) 1.21 1.20 0.93 1.21 1.24 1.22 1.25 1.20 1.02 1.02 1.03 1.12

24

Table 3.5 summarises economic effects associated with Communities and Nature sites. For Ystradllyn Cadair Idris there were an estimated 35,000 visitors in 2010/2011. The survey base was just under 2% of the total number of visitors with 179 surveys covering 603 people. Two-thirds of those surveyed were staying away from home. The GVA associated with the trips of which Ystradllyn was a part was £1.88m (around £54 per visitor), and with this amount of tourism consumption in Wales estimated to support 84 FTE jobs. The on-site impacts are much smaller reflecting the nature of the site. The GVA attributable to on-site spending was around £0.28m and with this supporting an estimated 15 FTE jobs in Wales directly and indirectly. In the 2013 survey at Ystradlyn (post-E4G works) the on-site attributable impacts were estimated at £0.41m with this spending supporting around 23 jobs.

Unsurprisingly, Table 3.5 reveals that the Great Orme site levers larger numbers of visitors (over 186,000 in 2012), but also with a higher proportion of economic impact associated with on-site spending. In 2012 visitor consumption associated with trips of which Great Orme was a part were associated with an estimated £10.3m of GVA and 460 supported FTE jobs. On site visitor spend contributed £2.3m of GVA and 125 FTEs. Cors Dyfi Ospreys shares some of the site characteristics of Ystradlyn. Here total trip impacts were estimated at £2.15m of GVA supported and 95 FTE jobs, with on-site impacts estimated at £0.18m of GVA supported and around 10 FTE jobs.

Taken together the nine CAN sites surveyed and analysed2 could be connected to tourism visits in Wales that contributed £24.7m of GVA and that supported 1,103 FTE jobs directly and indirectly. There may be the possibility of double-counting in the total trip figures as visitors to one site may have visited another CAN site. However, no data exists on the magnitude of these visits and the research team do not believe that the quantity of such visits would represent a major factor in the estimations.

The GVA attributable to on-site spending across the nine CAN initiatives per year was £4,434,400 and 239 FTE jobs supported directly and indirectly by on-site visitor consumption.

2 Ystradlyn, Stackpole Gardens and Great Orme were surveyed more than once so only their latest survey was included here to avoid double-counting; the sample size for Upton Gardens 2014 was too small to attempt an economic impact assessment here (instead it is included in the estimations of Table 3.6 below, see Green Links CIC).

25

3.5 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CAN SITE INITIATIVES THAT DID NOT CARRY OUT A SURVEY

Table 3.6 shows the estimated economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending at sites where visitor surveys were not undertaken. As noted above average spend and economic impact details here were taken from similar sites that had been surveyed and an average figure applied to the non-surveyed site annual visitor number to generate economic impacts.

The estimated total visitor spending impact of CAN initiatives that did not carry out a survey was £1,394,600 of value added per year; supporting around 74 FTE jobs.

Table 3.6 Estimated Annual Economic Impact of non-surveyed CAN E4G sitesE4G Initiative Type/Activity Annual

Visitor Number

GVA FTE1

Pembrokeshire CC 1.1. Cycle route5.8. Designated natural reserve

26,442 42,600 2.2

NWWT 5.8. Designated natural reserve8.1. Interpretation and presentation7.4 Nature & countryside events

28,964 196,300 10.6

Groundwork BNPT 1.2. Walking trail8.1. Interpretation and presentation

2,170 5,300 0.2

Swansea CC 1.4. Other route or link8.1. Interpretation and presentation

5,000 1,900 0.1

BTCV Llys Nini 5.1. Country Park/visitor centre8.1. Interpretation and presentation8.3. Informal training, coaching & skills development

4,742 23,800 1.3

BTCV Pembrey & Carmel

5.1. Country Park/visitor centre8.1. Interpretation/ presentation8.3. Informal training, coaching & skills development

22,492 112,700 6.2

Green Links CIC2 1.2. Walking trail5.2. Woodland or forest8.3. Informal training, coaching & skills development

1,240 3,000 0.1

Denbighshire Dee Valley

1.2. Walking trail1.4. Other route or link6.3. Walking

85,811 848,200 45.3

Bridgend CBC 1.4. Other route or link6.3. Walking

15,211 5,700 0.3

Gwynedd Council – Lon Las Ogwen

1.1. Cycle route1.3. Bridleway6.3. Walking

8,396 15,900 0.8

Plas Glyn y Weddw 8.1. Interpretation and presentation

21,893 53,500 2.5

5.2. Woodland or forest1.2. Walking trail

Dyfi Biosphere 1.2. Walking trail8.1. Interpretation and presentation7.3 Community events

467 1,100 0.1

Wild Fishing Wales 5.5. River, canal or stream 2,378 13,500 0.7Keep Wales Tidy 1.1. Cycle route

1.2. Walking trail6.2. Cycling

20,122 38,200 1.9

Snowdonia National Park- Rhyd Ddu

1.2. Walking trail5.2. Woodland or forest5.3. Hill, mountains or moorland

5,000 12,200 0.6

Felin Uchaf 4.5. Rural heritage5.1. Country Park/visitor centre8.3. Informal training, coaching & skills development

4,142 20,700 1.1

254,470 1,394,600 74.0NOTE 1: The “FTE” figure here refers to the estimate of full-time equivalent jobs (direct and indirect combined, on-site and elsewhere) supported by the site attributable tourism consumption. NOTE 2: Although the Greenlinks ‘Upton Woodland Scheme’ was surveyed there was insufficient data to carry out an economic impact assessment from the information collected; the economic impact of the site has therefore been estimated using proxy data from other surveys.

3.6 SUMMARY OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VISITOR SPENDING AT CAN INITIATIVES

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending associated with site initiatives (surveyed and non-surveyed, outlined in sections 3.4 and 3.5 above) it is estimated that in total they could be connected with on-site impacts of £5,829,000 of GVA per year and with this supporting employment of 313 full-time equivalents (Table 3.7).

Table 3.7 Summary of On-Site Attributable Economic Impacts of CAN InitiativesGross Value Added

(£) per yearFull-Time Equivalent

Employment(FTEs)

Surveyed sites 4,434,400 239Non-surveyed sites 1,394,600 74

5,829,000 313

27

3.7 THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COMMUNITIES AND NATURE PROJECT CAPITAL SPENDING

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending it is important to recognise that the Environment for Growth programme has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending on construction type activity. As has been noted above, all project activity has taken place within the Convergence Area of Wales, thus employment and incomes supported in construction could have important local effects.

Table 3.8 gives an estimate of the employment associated with the capital spending of the CAN E4G project from inception to completion. The estimates are reported as a range based on different regional sourcing assumptions. There is no attempt to differentiate different types of construction activity i.e. the spending is assumed to be connected to an average construction type activity in Wales. The framework of the Welsh Input-Output tables was used to estimate the indirect effects associated with the spending.

Table 3.8 reveals that the total estimated construction spend associated with the CAN E4G project was an estimated £8.1m. Taking the mid-range estimate of 80% local (i.e. Welsh) sourcing, we estimate that once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account that some £5.8m of value added is supported in Wales and around 135 jobs3. Put another way, if the construction activity bridged a period of three years, the E4G spending would have supported around 45 construction jobs and jobs in the construction supply chain over this three year period, and around £1.93m of value added per annum. However, the table also reveals that if local sourcing of the construction industry inputs averaged just 60% then a total of around £4.4m of value would have been supported and around 100 person years of employment. Care should be taken in interpreting these figures as they are not necessarily new jobs, but may be supporting already existing employment.

Table 3.8 Estimated Value Added and Employment Supported by CAN E4G Capital Spending to project completion

Project and Local sourcing assumption

Value Added (£m)Approx

Employment (FTE person years)*

100% 7.4 17080% 5.8 13560% 4.4 100

NOTE 1: Communities and Nature whole project capital spend to completion estimated at £8.134m.NOTE 2: The employment estimate numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5.

3 This is 12 months of employment28

3.8 CONCLUSION

The Monitoring and Evaluation project commissioned by the E4G programme partners in Wales required that Cardiff University estimate the economic impacts of visitor and capital spending at initiative sites.

This chapter reveals that the economic effects associated with the activity of the CAN strategic project are considerable.

The main aim of the CAN strategic project was to generate economic growth and sustainable jobs by capitalising on Wales’ environmental qualities particularly its landscape and wildlife. Data supplied by NRW (Table 3.1) shows that progress on overall project targets has been commendable with all targets exceeded, in some cases considerably – levered visitation has been very strong, as has managed access in terms of Kilometres developed.

Combining the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending with CAN initiative sites it is estimated that in total they could be connected with impacts of £5,829,000 of gross value added (GVA) per year and with this supporting employment of 313 full-time equivalents.

Furthermore, estimates for the economic impact of capital spending at CAN initiative sites were produced. Total estimated construction expenditure associated with the CAN project was £8.134m. Taking a mid-range estimate of 80% Welsh sourcing it is estimated that, once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account, that some £5.8m of value added is supported in Wales and around 135 jobs.

Moreover, we would argue that on the basis of prior projects evaluated by the Cardiff University team involving environmental assets, the nature of construction contracts issued commonly supports local firms and jobs as opposed to situations where contracts are awarded outside of the regional and West Wales and the Valleys economy.

More generally the analysis adds to the evidence base on the economic services derived from Welsh wildlife and visitor attractions, and from Welsh ecosystems.

The developing work on Natural Resource Management in Wales aims to ensure the optimization of the opportunities that Wales’ natural resources provide, and is seeking to emphasise the connections between the social, economic and environmental dimensions of ecosystems and the services they impart.

Visitation associated with CAN initiatives is one component of this economic dimension.

29

While it is very difficult to associate monetary values to bio-diversity and landscape, it has been possible here to assign monetary value to one set of tourist sites closely linked to the quality of regional environmental assets.

30

4. COASTAL TOURISM PROJECT ECONOMIC IMPACT

The overarching purpose of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work is to better understand the economic effects levered by both improvements to E4G sites, and visitation to E4G sponsored events. This section covers the estimation of the economic impact of the E4G Coastal Tourism (CT) strategic project from November 2009 to September 2015.

SUMMARY The economic impacts that are attributable to the CT programme take place largely away from

the visitor sites themselves (e.g. spending occurs in shops and on accommodation etc. in local towns). The analysis therefore looked at all trip related spending whether at the site or directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors).

Details of the 4 Centres of Excellence and Green Sea project within the overall CT project were included in the analysis. A total of 12 visitor surveys were carried out; with a combined 1,146 individual questionnaires completed.



ECONOMIC IMPACT

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending with initiative sites it is estimated that in total they could be connected with impacts of £8,118,000 of gross value added (GVA) per year and with this supporting employment of around 399 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

o Surveyed sites: GVA £4,722,000 per year; 241 FTEso Non-surveyed sites estimate: GVA £3,396,000 per year; 158 FTEso All sites estimate: GVA £8,118,000 per year; 399 FTEs.

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending the Coastal Tourism project has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending (construction type activity). Total estimated construction expenditure associated with the CT project was £14.8m. Taking a mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing it is estimated that, once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account, that some £10.7m of value added is supported in Wales and around 255 jobs.

31

4.1 INTRODUCTION

This section reports the estimated economic impact of spending arising from visitation to individual sites surveyed during the E4G project. Then economic impact estimates are provided for initiatives that were not surveyed but for which annual visitor numbers were submitted to the Cardiff research team. Here proxy data on spending from similar E4G initiatives was incorporated.

4.2 SCOPE OF THE COASTAL TOURISM E4G PROJECT

At the start of the monitoring and evaluation process for E4G, the WERU research team instituted the “e-flyer” as a means of picking-up basic information from initiatives. This was intended to provide an insight into the breadth of activity being undertaken, the time-scales associated with projects and their spending (with subdivisions for matched funding and ERDF elements) and details of the expected outputs from the projects.

The overarching project data also provided the evaluators with information used to develop typologies of initiatives, and to inform the numbers of initiatives which required more detailed surveys on top of simple volume counts. Table 4.1 lists the 4 Centres of Excellence and one project initiative for the CT E4G strategic project.

Table 4.1 List of Coastal Tourism Project Centres of ExcellenceCentres of Excellence (CoE)/ Projects Initiatives

Pembrokeshire Coastal Tourism CoEVisitor facilities in Coppet Hall, Solva and Porthgain; Visitor access to Pembrokeshire’s coastal waters: low water landing stages at Tenby, Angle and Dale;

Green Sea Project North and North West Wales; South & South West WalesSwansea Bay Watersports CoE Knab Rock; Pontoon; Olga; 360 Beach and WatersportsTrust in Aberdaron CoE Gwynedd- Aberdaron and Llyn

Saundersfoot Harbour CoEPhase 1: Outer harbour visitor pontoons; Outer harbour swinging visitor/ late tide moorings; Slipway and sea wall; Dry boat racking; Inner harbour landing pontoon; Sluice Decking.

For the individual initiatives of which the research team have data for, Table 4.2 indicates the total initial level of external and leveraged investment. Table 4.2 shows that there was an estimated total spend associated with these initiatives of around £18.8m, of which £8.7m represents ERDF support, and with an average intervention rate of 46%. The average expenditure associated with a Coastal Tourism E4G Centre of Excellence/ Project is £3.8m.

Table 4.2 Summary of Coastal Tourism Project Initiatives from E-Flyer ReturnsNumber of E4G

Initiative E-flyersTotal Value of

Initiative Spend (£s)Value of ERDF grant

aid £sCoastal Tourism Project 3 18,800,000 8,700,000

32

4.3 ECONOMIC IMPACT VISITOR SURVEYS CARRIED OUT AS PART OF THE CT E4G PROJECT

Table 4.3 shows the 12 visitor surveys that were carried out by CT initiatives. A total of 1,146 individual questionnaires were completed.

Table 4.3 Coastal Tourism Visitor Site Surveys undertaken

Number of questionnaires completed

Pembrokeshire CoE – Porthgain 2011/12 (Beaufort) 51Pembrokeshire CoE – Solva 2011/12 (Beaufort) 81Pembrokeshire CoE – Tenby 2011/12 (Beaufort) 87Green Sea project – Poppit Sands 2011/12 (Beaufort) 39Green Sea project – Newgale 2011/12 (Beaufort) 63Green Sea project – Saundersfoot 2011/12 (Beaufort) 49Green Sea project – E4G Baseline survey 36Pembrokeshire CoE – Porthgain 2013 169Pembrokeshire CoE – Solva 2013 154Pembrokeshire CoE - Coppet Hall 2013 50Green Sea project – North and North West Wales 2012 102Green Sea project– South and South West Wales 2013 265

1,146NOTE 1: The surveys carried out by Beaufort used a different questionnaire to the E4G standard. Economic impact estimates were not attempted for these.NOTE 2: A bespoke Green Sea Survey form was designed by the project stakeholders and WERU to capture the wider impacts of this initiative (see Section 4.7 for results of the extra Green Sea project analysis).

4.4 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COASTAL TOURISM SITE INITIATIVES CARRYING OUT A VISITOR SURVEY


The economic impact information in Table 4.4 is presented in two panels. First, the tables provide an estimate of the E4G site/event visitor total trip impact. Here for example the visit to an E4G site might only take up one day of a three day visit. However, we account for the economic impact

33

associated with the whole trip. The E4G site clearly represents just part of the visit but it is important to consider the type and impact of tourism in Wales that E4G is helping to lever. The second panel provides an estimate of the economic effects associated with the visit to the E4G site/event itself and is classified as an on-site impact. These are the effects associated with visitor spending at the site, and those directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors). It is possible that where visitors to E4G sites visited more than one initiative on their trip on a particular day, or were surveyed on their way to a site or event, then there is the possibility of double-counting their economic impact. However, after examining data on wider trip characteristics and the length of time spent at one E4G site, in the case of the Coastal Tourism Project initiatives we do not believe that there is a significant magnitude of error.


There are a number of determinants of the scale of economic impacts at site and trip level. Fundamentally this reflects differences in spending patterns from day trip as opposed to staying visitation, and then precisely what tourists spend money on. In the case of on-site economic effects this is inevitably bounded by the supply side around sites and events. Some E4G sites feature few opportunities to purchase goods and services often with good reason to preserve the services deriving from the environmental assets at sites. For these reasons care needs to be exercised in comparing sites on the economic impact numbers. Smaller on-site impacts may not be a bad news story.

Table 4.4 summarises economic effects associated with CT sites. Porthgain, part of the Pembrokeshire Coastal Tourism Centre of Excellence, was estimated to have received 120,800 visitors between September 2012 and August 2013. The GVA supported by trips of which this site was a part was around £7.8m and with linked tourism spending supporting an estimated 352 FTE jobs. On-site spending effects were £1.566m of GVA and 89 FTE jobs.

Green Sea North and North West Wales questionnaires were collected for visits to a number of sites (Llanfairfechan, Penmaenmawr and Rhyl) in 2012. Here, on-site spending effects for all Green Sea North and North West Wales sites combined were an estimated £0.453m of GVA and 21 FTE jobs. Taken together the Pembrokeshire Coastal Tourism Centre of Excellence and the Green Sea project could be connected to tourism visits in Wales that contributed £30.2m of GVA and that supported 1,344 FTE jobs directly and indirectly. There may be the possibility of double-counting in the total

34

trip figures as visitors to one site may have visited another CT site. However, analysis of visitor travel and dwell-time data suggests the number of such multi-CT project-destination trips is relatively small.

The GVA attributable to on-site spending across the two CT projects surveyed per year was £4,722,000 and 241 FTE jobs supported directly and indirectly by on-site visitor consumption.

This is split: Pembrokeshire Coastal Tourism Centre of Excellence £2,409,400 GVA and 135 FTE jobs supported; Green Sea project £2,312,100 GVA and 106 FTE jobs supported.

35

Table 4.4 Coastal Tourism Project –SITE Surveys Economic Impact

Porthgain 2013 Solva 2013Coppet Hall

2013

Green Sea - North & North West Wales

2012

Green Sea - South & South

West Wales 2013 Site Average

Type Site Site Site Site Site Site

Annual Visitors 120,800 96,300 11,530 85,324 555,523 173,895Dates for visitors Sep'12-Aug'13 Jun'12-May'13 May'13-Sep'13 year post completion Jan'13-Dec'13

Questionnaires completed 169 154 50 102 265 148

Number in respondents' parties 462 436 180 338 830 449

Staying away from home in Wales 66.0% 73.3% 85.7% 39.2% 17.9% 56.4%

Economic Impact

Total Trip

Gross Value Added £7,882,000 £6,911,000 £982,500 £3,150,000 £11,265,800 £6,038,260

Supported employment - FTE 352 308 44 140 500 269

GVA to create each job £22,392 £22,438 £22,330 £22,500 £22,532 £22,447

Trips to create job 343 313 262 609 1,111 646

Total trip GVA per visitor £65.25 £71.77 £85.21 £36.92 £20.28 £34.72

Directly attributable to site

Gross Value Added £1,565,600 £668,900 £174,900 £453,000 £1,859,100 £944,300

Employment FTEs 89 37 9 21 85 48

GVA to create each job 17,591 18,078 18,806 21,571 21,872 19,673

Visits to create job 1,357 2,603 1,240 4,063 6,536 3,623

On-site GVA per visitor £12.96 £6.95 £15.17 £5.31 £3.35 £5.43

GVA per visitor} total trip: on-site 5.03 10.33 5.62 6.95 6.06 6.39

GVA to create job} total trip: on-site 1.27 1.24 1.19 1.04 1.03 1.14

36

4.5 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COASTAL TOURISM SITE INITIATIVES THAT DID NOT CARRY OUT A SURVEY

Table 4.5 shows the estimated economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending at sites where visitor surveys were not undertaken. As noted above, average spend and economic impact details here were taken from similar sites that had been surveyed and an average figure applied to the non-surveyed site annual visitor number to generate economic impacts.

The estimated total visitor spending impact of CT initiatives that did not carry out a survey was £3,396,000 of value added per year; supporting around 158 FTE jobs.

Table 4.5 Estimated Economic Impact of non-surveyed CT E4G initiative sitesCT Centre of Excellence Site Annual Visitor

NumberGVA £s FTE

Swansea Bay Watersports Centre of Excellence All 394,540 1,745,000 80Saundersfoot Harbour Centre of Excellence All 251,258 1,651,000 78TOTAL 645,798 3,396,000 158

No visitor volume data were received from the initiatives based at Trust in Aberdaron.

4.6 SUMMARY OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VISITOR SPENDING AT COASTAL TOURISM CENTRES OF EXCELLENCE


Table 4.6 Summary of On-Site Attributable Economic Impacts of CT site InitiativesGross Value Added


Employment(FTEs)


8,118,000 399

4.7 OTHER IMPACTS: GREEN SEA INITIATIVE

The main themes of the Green Sea project are the new or improved facilities, and interpretation. Of overall importance is the level of visitor satisfaction. In other E4G monitoring and evaluation there has been only modest focus on visitor perceptions of the environment, therefore it was decided that the Green Sea initiative presented an opportunity to place into the monitoring process a focus on the facilities that are put in, and how environmental quality drives visitation.

To this end additional questions were added to the standard E4G visitor survey questionnaire focussing on perceptions of the beach visited, its infrastructure, and understanding what visitors expect. Baseline visitor surveys were then carried out to test the survey instrument and collect a small number of baseline responses. The approach adopted was to attempt to link this additional data on visitor ‘wants’ with the concrete poured for infrastructure improvements/ additions. The adapted E4G Green Sea questionnaire included asking respondents what improvements they would suggest to the beaches they were visiting- here adopting a ‘quality assured’ approach, developing thinking about what success would look like for the Green Sea initiative (which could then potentially be examined after construction works were completed, to see if the vision had been met).

Table 4.7 shows the breakdown of suggested improvements to beaches given in the baseline survey (pre-infrastructure development). The responses indicated a general relatively high preference for more facilities, particularly toilets (23%) and cafes/restaurants (20%).

Table 4.7 Summary of Visitor Suggested Beach Improvements (Baseline Green Sea Survey 2011)Suggested Improvements (unprompted) Percentage of

responsesMore facilities- toilets 23.4More facilities- cafes/restaurants 20.1More sheltered seating 10.0Better control of animals on beach (“fewer dogs off leads”/ “no animals”)

10.0

Tidy up promenade area 10.0Better disabled access 10.0Improve water quality 3.3More facilities- children’s playground 3.3More facilities- baby facilities 3.3More bins 3.3Other- More bicycle facilities (“bike track”) 3.3

100.0

Following the completion of works at the Green Sea sites, further visitor surveys were carried out in 2012 and 2013. Table 4.8 (Green Sea North & North West Wales, N&NW) and Table 4.9 (South & South West Wales, S&SW) highlight how important various aspects were in the choice of beach

38

respondents visited. In both regions the highest proportions of “very important” ratings by visitors were for “toilets” (72% in the north, 77% in the south) and “cleanliness” (71% in the north, and 79% in the south). Car parking also scored relatively highly in the ‘very important’ category (69% in the north and 74% in the south).

Table 4.8 Green Sea North & North West- Rating of importance in choosing beach to visit (%)Very

Important

Important Neutral

Not Importan

tNo

Influence AllCleanliness 71.3 21.8 5.0 1.0 1.0 100.0Provision of bins 51.1 38.3 9.6 1.1 0.0 100.0Provision of recycling 29.7 24.2 27.5 14.3 4.4 100.0Access to the beach 58.6 35.4 5.1 1.0 0.0 100.0Local amenities 40.2 38.1 17.5 4.1 0.0 100.0Proximity to home 31.6 38.9 21.1 6.3 2.1 100.0Blue Flag/ Green Coast Award 32.0 32.0 24.7 8.2 3.1 100.0Disabled Access 28.3 19.6 26.1 20.7 5.4 100.0Lifeguard Service 30.3 22.5 16.9 20.2 10.1 100.0Safety information 30.1 29.0 20.4 16.1 4.3 100.0Car Parking 69.3 20.8 6.9 3.0 0.0 100.0Toilets 72.0 20.0 6.0 2.0 0.0 100.0Beach information & signage 32.0 28.9 25.8 10.3 3.1 100.0

Of particular interest was how important the beach designation (i.e. Blue Flag/ Green Coast) was to visitation. In the north around one in three (32%) stated it was ‘very important’ and a further third (32%) that it was ‘important’. Meanwhile, in the south over two-thirds thought the designation was ‘very important’ (69%).

Table 4.9 Green Sea South & South West- Rating of importance in choosing beach to visit (%)Very

ImportantImportan

t NeutralNot

ImportantNo

influence AllCleanliness 78.7 19.8 1.5 0.0 0.0 100.0Provision of bins 73.7 19.5 4.8 1.2 0.8 100.0Provision of recycling 61.6 20.4 12.4 2.8 2.8 100.0Access to the beach 70.4 25.7 2.7 0.8 0.4 100.0Local amenities 65.6 22.8 7.6 2.4 1.6 100.0Proximity to home 68.9 19.9 8.4 1.2 1.6 100.0Blue Flag/ Green Coast Award 68.7 19.7 8.0 2.0 1.6 100.0Disabled Access 69.0 15.5 9.8 4.1 1.6 100.0Lifeguard Service 70.3 16.5 8.4 3.2 1.6 100.0Safety information 67.3 19.8 9.3 1.6 2.0 100.0Car Parking 74.0 22.4 2.8 0.4 0.4 100.0Toilets 77.2 19.7 2.3 0.0 0.8 100.0Beach information & signage 64.5 21.9 8.8 4.0 0.8 100.0

39

Visitors were also asked whether when planning their visit did they prefer a particular type of beach (small, large, busy, quiet) and if they considered the quality of water at the beach before they visited. Table 4.10 shows the percentage of all respondents agreeing with the statements asked. Here it can be observed that in the north similar proportions of respondents expressed a preference for small (26%) or big beaches (25%) whereas in the south there was a relatively high preference for bigger beaches (43% against just 22% for small). Around one in seven respondents (14%) in both regions noted that they usually considered the quality of water before their visit. A higher proportion of respondents in both regions expressed a preference for quiet beaches over busy ones.

Table 4.10 Preferences of respondents when planning a visit GREEN SEA N&NWPercentage of all respondents (%)

GREEN SEA S&SWPercentage of all respondents (%)

Prefer small beaches 25.5 22.3Prefer bigger beaches 24.5 42.6Consider the quality of the water before visit 14.7 14.0Prefer quiet beaches 43.1 47.2Prefer busy beaches 11.8 18.1Note 1: Respondents could name more than one aspect

Respondents were asked to give a rating for various aspects of the beach on the day of their visit- Tables 4.11 and 4.12 highlight the results by region. In the north and north west the highest levels of dissatisfaction were found with recycling facilities (36% stating they were ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’) and the lifeguard service (25% ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’). However, the lifeguard service also scored among the highest proportion of responses in the “excellent” category in the north at 44%, reflecting the smaller sample size for this question (there were relatively many “don’t know” responses) and fewer people grading it as ‘ok’ compared to other aspects (only 5%, with the next lowest being car parking with 18% in the ‘ok’ category).

Table 4.11 Rating of Aspects of Beaches in Green Sea North & North West Wales (%)

Excellent Good Ok PoorVery Poor All

Cleanliness 31.7 42.6 21.8 4.0 0.0 100.0Litter bins 25.3 43.4 29.3 1.0 1.0 100.0Recycling facilities 19.3 18.1 26.5 31.3 4.8 100.0Beach Access 39.4 23.2 24.2 12.1 1.0 100.0Lifeguard service 43.8 26.6 4.7 15.6 9.4 100.0Safety information 22.7 26.1 33.0 17.0 1.1 100.0Car Parking 51.5 26.3 18.2 3.0 1.0 100.0Toilets 33.3 26.0 34.4 5.2 1.0 100.0Beach information & signage 21.3 27.7 31.9 17.0 2.1 100.0Dog Control 15.1 23.7 50.5 5.4 5.4 100.0

40

In the south and south west, dog control and recycling facilities were the biggest negative issues with one in five respondents (20%) stating each was either ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’. The lifeguard service had the highest proportion of ‘excellent’ ratings in the south with two in three respondents (66%) scoring it in this category. Cleanliness also scored relatively highly here with three in five visitors (60%) stating that it was ‘excellent’ at the beach they visited, and a further one in three (33%) indicating that it was ‘good’.

Table 4.12 Rating of Aspects of Beaches in Green Sea South & South West Wales (%)

Excellent Good OK PoorVery Poor All

Cleanliness 59.6 33.3 4.7 2.0 0.4 100.0Litter bins 55.7 34.5 6.7 2.7 0.4 100.0Recycling facilities 44.2 27.2 9.7 12.9 6.0 100.0Beach Access 58.3 33.1 7.5 1.2 0.0 100.0Lifeguard service 65.9 25.7 5.3 0.9 2.2 100.0Safety information 50.9 33.8 11.1 4.3 0.0 100.0Car Parking 50.0 34.1 11.1 4.0 0.8 100.0Toilets 48.4 29.7 11.8 6.9 3.3 100.0Beach information & signage 44.8 36.8 16.7 1.7 0.0 100.0Dog Control 40.0 26.7 13.8 12.1 7.5 100.0

Visitors were questioned on whether they had actually checked the water quality of the beach before their visit. Only one in twenty responded positively (N&NW 5.3%; S&SW 5.2%).

Finally, respondents were asked to give an overall rating to the beach they visited. Table 4.13 shows that seven in ten respondents (69%) who had visited Green Sea beaches in the north thought they had been ‘excellent’ or ‘good’. The corresponding percentage in the south was a very high 96.5%, with over three in five (62%) stating that the beach was ‘excellent’.

Table 4.13 Overall how did respondents rate the beach they visited? (%)

Excellent GoodAverage/

OK Poor V Poor AllGS North & North West Wales 18.0 51.0 30.0 1.0 0.0 100.0GS South & South West Wales 62.1 34.4 3.1 0.4 0.0 100.0

41

4.8 THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF COASTAL TOURISM PROJECT CAPITAL SPENDING

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending it is important to recognise that the Environment for Growth programme has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending, in large measure, on construction type activity. It is noted that selected project activity has taken place in more needy parts of the regional economy, such that employment and incomes supported in construction could have important local effects.

It is stressed that what follows is an estimate of the employment associated with the capital spending of the CT E4G project from inception to end. The estimates in Table 4.14 are reported as a range based on different regional sourcing assumptions. There is also here no attempt to differentiate different types of construction activity i.e. the spending is assumed to be connected to an average construction type activity in Wales. The framework of the Welsh Input-Output tables was used to estimate the indirect effects associated with the spending.

Table 4.14 reveals that the total estimated construction spend associated with the CT E4G project was an estimated £14.813m. Taking the mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing, we estimate that once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account that some £10.7m of value added is supported in Wales and around 255 jobs4. Put another way if the construction activity bridged a period of three years, the E4G spending would have supported around 85 construction jobs and jobs in the construction supply chain over this three year period, and around £3.6m of value added per annum. However, the table also reveals that if local sourcing of the construction industry inputs averaged just 60% then a total of around £8.0m of value would have been supported and around 190 person years of employment. Care should be taken in interpreting these figures as they are not necessarily new jobs, but may be supporting already existing employment.

Table 4.14 Estimated Value Added and Employment Supported by CT E4G Capital Spending to project completion


Value Added (£m)Approx Employment (FTE person years)*

100% 13.3 32080% 10.7 25560% 8.0 190

NOTE 1: Coastal Tourism project whole project capital spend to completion estimated at £14.813m.NOTE 2: The employment estimate numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5.


4.9 COASTAL TOURISM PROJECT WEFO OUTPUTS

Table 4.15 outlines the WEFO targets and outputs related to the Coastal Tourism project as received by WERU from Visit Wales.

Table 4.15 Coastal Tourism Project WEFO Outputs

Output TargetAchieved to

date Left to claimGross jobs created 74 71 3Visits 848,670 1,154,248 0Enterprises assisted 21 17 4Initiatives developing the natural and/ or historic environment 36 32 4Managed access to countryside or coast (km) 26 27.24 0

43

5. HERITAGE TOURISM PROJECT ECONOMIC IMPACT

The overarching purpose of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work is to better understand the economic effects levered by both improvements to E4G sites, and visitation to E4G sponsored events. This section covers the estimation of the economic impact of the E4G Heritage Tourism Project (HTP) strategic project from November 2009 to August 2014.

SUMMARY

The economic impacts that are attributable to the HTP programme take place largely away from the visitor sites themselves (e.g. spending occurs in shops and on accommodation etc. in local towns). The analysis therefore looked at all trip related spending whether at the site or directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors).

Details of 25 initiatives in HTP were included in the analysis. A total of 28 visitor surveys were carried out at initiative sites with a combined 3,830 individual questionnaires completed.



ECONOMIC IMPACT

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending with initiative sites it is estimated that in total they could be connected with impacts of £19,363,000 of gross value added (GVA) per year and with this supporting employment of around 1,045 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

o Surveyed sites: GVA £14,123,600 per year; 762 FTEso Non-surveyed sites estimate: GVA £5,239,400 per year; 283 FTEso All sites estimate: GVA £19,363,000 per year; 1,045 FTEs.

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending the HTP has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending (construction type activity). Total estimated construction expenditure associated with the HTP project was £15.9m. Taking a mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing it is estimated that, once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account, that some £11.4m of value added is supported in Wales and around 270 jobs.

44

5.1 INTRODUCTION

This section reports the estimated economic impact of spending arising from visitation to individual sites surveyed during the E4G programme. Then economic impact estimates are provided for initiatives that were not surveyed but for which annual visitor numbers were submitted to the Cardiff research team. Here proxy data on spending from similar E4G initiatives was incorporated.

5.2 SCOPE OF HTP E4G INITIATIVES


The overarching project data also provided the evaluators with information used to develop typologies of initiatives, and to inform the numbers of initiatives which required more detailed surveys on top of simple volume counts. Table 5.1 lists the 25 initiatives for the HTP E4G strategic project.

Table 5.1 List of HTP Initiatives CADW PROJECTS

Anglesey Neoliothic – Barclodiad y Gawres and Bryn Celli DduBlaenavon IronworksCaernarfon CastleCaerphilly CastleConwy CastleDenbighDyfi FurnaceHarlech CastleSegontiumSt Davids Bishops PalaceStrata Florida Abbey

NON-CADW PROJECTS (and sites)

Calch (Limestone Heritage) Black Mountain Quarries

Carew Castle Carew Castle

Castell Henllys Castell Henllys

Castles & Princes, Carmarthenshire / Princes of Deheubarth and Lords of the Southern March

Careg Cennen CastleCarmarthen CastleDinefwr CastlePembroke CastleSwansea Castle

Ceredigion Churches

45

Defence of the Realm Chapel Bay Fort (Angle, Pembrokeshire)

Denbigh Town and CastleHafod Morfa Copperworks Hafod Morfa Copperworks

Mona Antiqua

Copper Kingdom CentreHubsHolyheadLlanddwyn IslandParys Mountain

Our Heritage

Great Orme Country ParkGreat Orme MinesLlandudno MuseumLlechwedd Slate CavernsOriel PendeitshQuarry Hospital/ Park PadarnConwy Oral HistoryNorth Wales Pilgrim TrailSlate Trail

Oystermouth Castle Oystermouth Castle

Pontcysyllte Aqueduct Horseshoe Falls

Princes of Gwynedd

Conwy Tourist Information Centre HubCricciethDinas EmrysDolbadarnDolwyddelan

Romans in Carmarthenshire

Carmarthen FortCarmarthen MuseumCarn GochDolaucothi Roman Gold MinesWaun DduYr Pigwn Ddu

For the individual initiatives of which the research team have data for, Table 5.2 indicates the total initial level of external and leveraged investment. Table 5.2 shows that there was an estimated total spend associated with these initiatives of around £16.991m, of which £7.645m represents ERDF support, and with an average intervention rate of 45%. The average expenditure associated with a Heritage Tourism Project E4G initiative is £849,550.

Table 5.2 Summary of Heritage Tourism Project Initiatives from E-Flyer ReturnsNumber of E4G



aid £sHeritage Tourism Project 20 16,991,000 7,645,950

Cadw were also able to supply timely and in-depth energy usage data for their sites in the HTP E4G initiative (the research team had intended to use E4G-wide data to enable a carbon assessment of the E4G project as a whole, but scarce data from the other five strategic projects prevented this).

46

5.3 ECONOMIC IMPACT VISITOR SURVEYS CARRIED OUT AS PART OF THE HTP E4G PROJECT

Table 5.3 shows the 28 visitor surveys that were carried out by HTP initiatives. A total of 3,830 individual questionnaires were completed at 22 individual sites (Caernarfon, Caerphilly, Conwy, Harlech, St Davids and Blaenavon were surveyed twice over the duration of the project).

Table 5.3 HTP Visitor Surveys undertaken


completed


Blaenavon 2011 183 SiteCaernarfon 2011 209 SiteCaerphilly 2011 223 SiteConwy 2011 226 SiteHarlech 2011 207 SiteSt Davids 2011 199 SiteCarew Castell 2013 130 SiteCastell Henllys 2013 168 SitePembroke 2013 100 SiteDinefwr 2013 73 SiteCarmarthen 2013 30 SiteDinas Emrys, Beddgelert 2013 130 SiteLlanddwyn 2013 114 SiteCopper Kingdom Centre 2013 50 SiteParys Mountain 2013 55 SiteGreat Orme Mines 2013 60 SitePendeitsh Caernarfon 2013/14 140 SiteOystermouth Castle 2013 120 SiteBlaenavon Ironworks 2013/14 104 SiteCaernarfon Castle 2013/14 249 SiteCaerphilly Castle 2013/14 196 SiteCarreg Cennen Castle 2013/14 107 SiteConwy Castle 212 SiteCriccieth Castle 2013/14 184 SiteDenbigh 2013/14 106 SiteHarlech 2013/14 90 SiteSt Davids 2013/14 141 SiteStrata Florida 2013/14 24 Site

3,830NOTE 1: Where site sample sizes were too small (typically < 100) economic impact assessment estimates were not undertaken.

47

5.4 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF HTP SITE INITIATIVES CARRYING OUT A VISITOR SURVEY


The economic impact information in Table 5.4 is presented in two panels. First, the tables provide an estimate of the E4G site/event visitor total trip impact. Here for example the visit to an E4G site might only take up one day of a three day visit. However, we account for the economic impact associated with the whole trip. The E4G site clearly represents just part of the visit but it is important to consider the type and impact of tourism in Wales that E4G is helping to lever. The second panel provides an estimate of the economic effects associated with the visit to the E4G site/event itself and is classified as an on-site impact. These are the effects associated with visitor spending at the site, and those directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors). It is possible that where visitors to E4G sites visited more than one initiative on their trip on a particular day, or were surveyed on their way to a site or event, then there is the possibility of double-counting their economic impact. However, after examining data on wider trip characteristics and the length of time spent at one E4G site, in the case of the Heritage Tourism Project initiatives we do not believe that there is a significant magnitude of error.



48

For surveys where sample sizes and data quality was adequate (25 out of the 28 surveys), Table 5.4 summarises economic effects associated with HTP sites.

Blaenavon Ironworks was estimated to have received 28,055 visitors between October 2009 and September 2010. The GVA supported by trips of which this site was a part was around £1.6m and with linked tourism spending supporting an estimated 73 FTE jobs. On-site spending effects were £0.26m of GVA and 14 FTE jobs. Blaenavon survey results were available for 2011 and 2013/14, and illustrate that despite annual visitor numbers decreasing to 18,867 in 2013/14, whilst work was ongoing, higher average spending per visitor meant that GVA supported on-site remained relatively stable at £0.24m and 13 FTE jobs. Taken together the 19 HTP sites surveyed (Caernarfon, Caerphilly, Conwy, Harlech, St Davids and Blaenavon were surveyed twice) could be connected to tourism visits in Wales that contributed £63.6m of GVA and that supported 2,850 FTE jobs directly and indirectly. There may be the possibility of double-counting in the total trip figures as visitors to one site may have visited another HTP site. However, analysis of visitor travel and dwell-time data suggests the number of such multi-HTP-destination is relatively small.

The GVA attributable to on-site spending across the nineteen HTP sites per year was £14,123,600 and 762 FTE jobs supported directly and indirectly by on-site visitor consumption.

49

Table 5.4 Heritage Tourism Project –SITE Surveys Economic Impact

Blaenavon 2011 Caernarfon 2011 Caerphilly 2011 Conwy 2011 Harlech 2011 St Davids 2011Carew Castell

2013Castell Henllys

2013

Type Site Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te

Annual Vis i tors 28,085 191,871 84,631 177,411 93,624 26,165 30,992 24,310

Dates for vis i tors Oct'09-Sep'10 Oct'09-Sep'10 Oct'09-Sep'10 Oct'09-Sep'10 Oct'09-Sep'10 Oct'09-Sep'10 Jan'13 to Sep'13 Oct'12-Sep'13

Ques tionaires completed 183 209 223 226 207 199 130 168

Number in respondents ' parties 598 829 735 803 835 686 449 671

Staying away from home in Wales 53.0% 88.0% 57.8% 82.7% 91.8% 92.5% 86.8% 81.7%

Economic Impact

Tota l Trip

Gros s Va lue Added £1,643,000 £14,029,000 £4,433,000 £12,622,000 £6,799,000 £2,186,000 £2,257,000 £1,749,800

Supported employment - FTE 73 630 199 565 305 95 101 78

GVA to create each job £22,507 £22,268 £22,276 £22,340 £22,292 £23,011 £22,347 £22,433

Trips to create job 385 305 425 314 307 275 307 312

Tota l trip GVA per vis i tor £58.50 £73.12 £52.38 £71.15 £72.62 £83.55 £72.83 £71.98

Directly attributa ble to s i te

Gros s Va lue Added £263,000 £3,618,000 £1,230,000 £3,317,000 £1,347,000 £697,000 £262,900 £256,970

Employment FTEs 14 197 63 180 70 35 14 14

GVA to create each job 18,786 18,365 19,524 18,428 19,243 19,914 18,779 18,355

Vis i ts to create job 2,006 974 1,343 986 1,337 748 2,214 1,736

On-s i te GVA per vis i tor £9.36 £18.86 £14.53 £18.70 £14.39 £26.64 £8.48 £10.57

GVA per vis i tor} total trip: on-s i te 6.25 3.88 3.60 3.81 5.05 3.14 8.59 6.81

GVA to create job} total trip: on-s i te 1.20 1.21 1.14 1.21 1.16 1.16 1.19 1.22

50

Pembroke 2013 Dinefwr 2013Dinas Emrys

2013 Llanddwyn 2013Copper Kingdom

2013Great Orme Mines 2013

Pendeitsh Caernarfon

2013/14Oystermouth

Castle 2013

Blaenavon Ironworks

2013/14

Type Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te

Annua l Vis i tors 83,867 59,844 1,933 30,000 6,022 26,581 4,885 15,445 18,867

Dates for vis i tors Apr'13-Mar'14 Apr'12-Mar'13 Jan'13-Dec'13 Jan'13-Dec'13 Jan'13-Dec'13 Sep'12-Aug'13 Jul '13-Apr'14 Jan'13-Dec'13 Apr'13-Mar'14

Questi onai res completed 100 73 130 114 50 60 140 120 104

Number in res pondents ' parties 384 251 420 249 136 194 420 390 314

Staying away from home in Wales 81.0% 65.8% 92.3% 58.8% 84.0% 72.9% 95.0% 29.9% 65.4%

Economic Impact

Total Trip

Gross Value Added £5,514,300 £4,538,800 £129,100 £1,847,770 £550,200 £1,418,300 £421,300 £408,200 £1,082,900

Supported employment - FTE 246 202 6 83 25 64 19 18 49

GVA to create each job £22,416 £22,469 £21,517 £22,262 £22,008 £22,161 £22,174 £22,678 £22,100

Trips to create job 341 296 322 361 241 415 257 858 385

Total trip GVA per vis i tor £65.75 £75.84 £66.79 £61.59 £91.36 £53.36 £86.24 £26.43 £57.40

Directly attributable to s i te

Gross Value Added £819,700 £862,600 £26,250 £352,500 £81,800 £445,600 £82,800 £27,700 £242,800

Employment FTEs 44 46 1.4 19 4.4 25 4.4 1.5 13

GVA to create each job 18,630 18,752 18,750 18,553 18,591 17,824 18,818 18,467 18,677

Vis its to create job 1,906 1,301 1,381 1,579 1,369 1,063 1,110 10,297 1,451

On-s ite GVA per vis i tor £9.77 £14.41 £13.58 £11.75 £13.58 £16.76 £16.95 £1.79 £12.87

GVA per vis i tor} total trip: on-s i te 6.73 5.26 4.92 5.24 6.73 3.18 5.09 14.74 4.46

GVA to create job} total trip: on-s ite 1.20 1.20 1.15 1.20 1.18 1.24 1.18 1.23 1.18

51

Caernarfon Castle 2013/14

Caerphilly Castle 2013/14

Carreg Cennen Castle 2013/14

Conwy Castle 2013/14

Criccieth Castle 2013/14 Denbigh 2013/14 Harlech 2013/14

St Davids 2013/14 Site average

Type Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te Si te

Annual Vis i tors 167,860 110,954 17,161 176,231 40,574 13,461 74,335 32,454 61,503

Dates for vi s i tors Apr'13-Mar'14 Apr'13-Mar'14 Apr'13-Mar'14 Apr'13-Mar'14 Apr'13-Mar'14 Apr'13-Mar'14 Apr'13-Mar'14 Apr'13-Mar'14

Questionaires completed 249 196 107 212 184 106 90 141 149

Number in respondents ' parties 1,215 628 301 929 699 318 287 430 527

Staying awa y from home in Wales 79.9% 57.1% 47.7% 75.5% 97.3% 66.0% 86.7% 78.7% 74.7%

Economic Impact

Tota l Trip

Gross Va lue Added £13,274,600 £4,978,500 £863,600 £11,493,300 £3,124,500 £448,400 £5,288,000 £2,894,800 £4,159,815

Supported employment - FTE 595 224 39 516 140 20 237 130 186

GVA to create each job £22,310 £22,225 £22,144 £22,274 £22,318 £22,420 £22,312 £22,268 £22,321

Trips to create job 282 495 440 342 290 673 314 250 330

Tota l trip GVA per vis i tor £79.08 £44.87 £50.32 £65.22 £77.01 £33.31 £71.14 £89.20 £67.64

Directly attributable to s i te

Gross Va lue Added £2,659,500 £1,545,100 £170,000 £3,177,500 £609,300 £181,800 £1,151,400 £639,000 £962,689

Employment FTEs 142 82 9.5 178 33 10 63 34 52

GVA to create each job 18,729 18,843 17,895 17,851 18,464 18,180 18,276 18,794 18,553

Vis its to create job 1,182 1,353 1,806 990 1,230 1,346 1,180 955 1,185

On-s i te GVA per vi s i tor £15.84 £13.93 £9.91 £18.03 £15.02 £13.51 £15.49 £19.69 £15.65

GVA per vi s i tor} tota l trip: on-s i te 4.99 3.22 5.08 3.62 5.13 2.47 4.59 4.53 4.32

GVA to create job} tota l tri p: on-s i te 1.19 1.18 1.24 1.25 1.21 1.23 1.22 1.18 1.20

Note 1: Despite relatively small sample sizes, economic impact estimates were made for Harlech (2013/14), Dinefwr (2013) and Great Orme Mines (2013/14) where it was deemed that the spending data was of high enough quality. Data for Parys Mountain was combined with Copper Kingdom (Centre) to estimate for the latter.

52

5.5 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF HTP SITE INITIATIVES THAT DID NOT CARRY OUT A SURVEY

Table 5.5 shows the estimated economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending at sites where visitor surveys were not undertaken. Here, average spend per visitor and economic impact details were taken from the overall HTP surveyed sites average (except in the case of Great Orme Country Park where other E4G site surveys were used as a proxy). These figures were applied to the non-surveyed site annual visitor number to generate economic impacts.

The estimated total visitor spending impact of HTP initiatives that did not carry out a survey was £5,239,400 of value added per year; supporting around 283 FTE jobs.

Table 5.5 Estimated Economic Impact of non-surveyed HTP E4G initiative sitesHTP Project Site Annual

Visitor Number

GVA £s FTE

Strata Florida Abbey 4,846 76,000 4.1Calch (Limestone Heritage) Black Mountain Quarries 10,938 171,600 9.2Castles & Princes Carmarthen 18,626 292,200 15.7Chapel Bay Fort 180 2,800 0.2Hafod Copperworks 7,128 111,800 6.0Our Heritage Great Orme Country Park 192,765 680,600 37.3Our Heritage Llandudno Museum 3,233 50,700 2.7Our Heritage Llechwedd Slate Caverns 49,511 776,600 41.9Our Heritage Quarry Hospital/ Park Padarn 90,535 1,420,100 76.5Pontcysyllte Aqueduct Llantysilio Green Car Park/ Horseshoe Falls 41,638 653,000 35.2Princes of Gwynedd Conwy Tourist Information Centre Hub 15,818 n/a n/aPrinces of Gwynedd Dolbadarn 40,574 636,400 34.3Princes of Gwynedd Dolwyddelan 4,586 71,900 3.9Romans in Carmarthenshire Dolaucothi Roman Gold Mines 18,882 295,700 15.9TOTAL 499,260 5,239,400 282.9NOTE 1: For Conwy Tourist Information Centre Hub the impact was deemed to be largely directed at the quality of visit rather than spend levels

No visitor volume data were received from the initiatives based at: Swansea Castle (Castles & Princes project); Ceredigion Churches; Holyhead, Parys Mountain, and Hubs (Mona Antiqua); or Carmarthen Fort, Carmarthen Museum, Waun Ddu and Yr Pigwn Ddu (all Romans in Carmarthenshire).

5.6 SUMMARY OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VISITOR SPENDING AT HTP INITIATIVES

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending associated with site initiatives (surveyed and non-surveyed, outlined in sections 5.4 and 5.5 above) it is estimated that in total they could be connected with on-site impacts of £19,363,000 of GVA per year and with this supporting employment of 1,045 full-time equivalents (Table 5.6).

Table 5.6 Summary of On-Site Attributable Economic Impacts of HTP SITE InitiativesGross Value Added


Employment(FTEs)


19,363,000 1,045

5.7 THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF HERITAGE TOURISM PROJECT CAPITAL SPEND


It is stressed that what follows is an estimate of the employment associated with the capital spending of the HTP E4G project from inception to end. The estimates in Table 5.7 are reported as a range based on different regional sourcing assumptions. There is also here no attempt to differentiate different types of construction activity i.e. the spending is assumed to be connected to an average construction type activity in Wales. The framework of the Welsh Input-Output tables was used to estimate the indirect effects associated with the spending.

Table 5.7 reveals that the total estimated construction spend associated with the HTP E4G project was an estimated £15.9m. Taking the mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing, we estimate that once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account that some £11.4m of value added is supported in Wales and around 270 jobs5. Put another way if the construction activity bridged a period of three years, the E4G spending would have supported around 90 construction jobs and jobs in the construction supply chain over this three year period, and around £3.8m of value added per annum. However, the table also reveals that if local sourcing of the construction industry inputs averaged just 60% then a total of around £8.6m of value would have been supported and around 200 person years of employment. Care should be taken in interpreting these figures as they are not necessarily new jobs, but may be supporting already existing employment.

Table 5.7 Estimated Value Added and Employment Supported by HTP E4G Capital Spending to project completion




100% 14.3 33580% 11.4 27060% 8.6 200

NOTE 1: Heritage Tourism Project whole project capital spend to completion estimated at £15.9m.NOTE 2: The employment estimate numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5.

6. SUSTAINABLE TOURISM PROJECT ECONOMIC IMPACT

55

The overarching purpose of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work is to better understand the economic effects levered by both improvements to E4G sites, and visitation to E4G sponsored events. This section covers the estimation of the economic impact of the E4G Sustainable Tourism (ST) strategic project from November 2009 to September 2015.

SUMMARY The economic impacts that are attributable to the ST programme take place largely away from

the visitor sites themselves (e.g. spending occurs in shops and on accommodation etc. in local towns). The analysis therefore looked at all trip related spending whether at the site or directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors).

Details of the 4 Centres of Excellence within the ST project were included in the analysis. A total of 11 visitor surveys were carried out (6 at sites; 5 at specific events); with a combined 1,261 individual questionnaires completed.



ECONOMIC IMPACT

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending with initiative sites it is estimated that in total they could be connected with impacts of £4,932,000 of gross value added (GVA) per year and with this supporting employment of around 232 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

o Surveyed sites: GVA £2,212,600 per year; 107 FTEso Non-surveyed sites estimate: GVA £2,719,400 per year; 125 FTEso All sites estimate: GVA £4,932,000 per year; 232 FTEs.

The economic effects associated with events (a subset of the site impacts above, not additional) were estimated to have supported £128,000 of GVA and with spending directly and indirectly supporting 7 full-time equivalent jobs.

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending the ST project has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending (construction type activity). Total estimated construction expenditure associated with the ST project was £13.7m. Taking a mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing it is estimated that, once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account, that some £9.9m of value added is supported in Wales and around 230 jobs.

6.1 INTRODUCTION

56

This section reports the estimated economic impact of spending arising from visitation to individual sites and events surveyed during the E4G project. Then economic impact estimates are provided for initiatives that were not surveyed but for which annual visitor numbers were submitted to the Cardiff research team. Here proxy data on spending from similar E4G initiatives was incorporated.

6.2 SCOPE OF THE SUSTAINABLE TOURISM E4G PROJECT


The overarching project data also provided the evaluators with information used to develop typologies of initiatives, and to inform the numbers of initiatives which required more detailed surveys on top of simple volume counts. Table 6.1 lists the 4 Centres of Excellence initiatives for the ST E4G strategic project.

Table 6.1 List of Sustainable Tourism Project Centres of ExcellenceCentres of Excellence Initiatives

One Historic Garden Aberglasney, Bryngarw, Colby, Cwmdonkin Park, Margam, Penllergare Valley Woods, and Scolton.

Eryri Centre of Excellence North Wales Antur Stiniog, Yr Urdd, Prysor Angling, Cyngor Gwynedd

Off Road Cycling South Wales (Cognation) Afan Forest Park, Cwmcarn, Bike Park Wales (Gethin Woods, Merthyr Tydfil)

North Wales Cycling Llyn Brenig, Iconic Route (Gors Maen Llwyd, Gaer Efanechtyd), Natural Ways (Penycae-Llantysilio).

For the individual initiatives of which the research team have data for, Table 6.2 indicates the total initial level of external and leveraged investment. Table 6.2 shows that there was an estimated total spend associated with these initiatives of around £18.913m, of which £8.2m represents ERDF support, and with an average intervention rate of 43%. The average expenditure associated with a Sustainable Tourism E4G Centre of Excellence is £4.7m.

Table 6.2 Summary of Sustainable Tourism Project Initiatives from E-Flyer ReturnsNumber of E4G



aid £sSustainable Tourism Project 4 18,913,000 8,200,000

6.3 ECONOMIC IMPACT VISITOR SURVEYS CARRIED OUT AS PART OF THE ST E4G PROJECT

57

Table 6.3 shows the 11 visitor surveys that were carried out by ST initiatives (5 at events; and 6 being site based). A total of 1,261 individual questionnaires were completed.

Table 6.3 Sustainable Tourism Visitor Surveys undertaken


completed


Halo British Series 2011 95 EventETAPE Bicycle Event 2011 75 EventOne Historic Garden- Bryngarw “Shakespeare, Songs & Silliness” 2011 50 Event

ETAPE Bicycle Event 2012 103 EventChain Reaction Bicycle Event 2012 57 EventPenllergare Valley Woods 2012 95 SiteCwmdonkin 2012 50 SiteScolton 2012 99 SiteAberglasney 2013 49 SiteAfan Forest Park 2012 161 SiteCognation 2013 427 Site

1,261

6.4 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM SITE INITIATIVES CARRYING OUT A VISITOR SURVEY


The economic impact information in Table 6.4 is presented in two panels. First, the tables provide an estimate of the E4G site/event visitor total trip impact. Here for example the visit to an E4G site might only take up one day of a three day visit. However, we account for the economic impact associated with the whole trip. The E4G site clearly represents just part of the visit but it is important to consider the type and impact of tourism in Wales that E4G is helping to lever. The second panel provides an estimate of the economic effects associated with the visit to the E4G site/event itself and is classified as an on-site impact. These are the effects associated with visitor spending at the site, and those directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s

58

accommodation for staying visitors). It is possible that where visitors to E4G sites visited more than one initiative on their trip on a particular day, or were surveyed on their way to a site or event, then there is the possibility of double-counting their economic impact. However, after examining data on wider trip characteristics and the length of time spent at one E4G site, in the case of the Sustainable Tourism Project initiatives we do not believe that there is a significant magnitude of error.

The economic impact is reported in terms of gross value added and supported employment. It is important to note that the employment estimates in the second panel do not link directly to full time equivalent employment at the respective sites. Rather the economic impact tables reveal the direct and indirect employment impacts associated with the tourism spending as a whole. For example this reflects the amount of annual full-time equivalent (FTE) employment supported per £ of different types of tourism spending in Wales for a given year. There are a number of determinants of the scale of economic impacts at site and trip level. Fundamentally this reflects differences in spending patterns from day trip as opposed to staying visitation, and then precisely what tourists spend money on. In the case of on-site economic effects this is inevitably bounded by the supply side around sites and events. Some E4G sites feature few opportunities to purchase goods and services often with good reason to preserve the services deriving from the environmental assets at sites. For these reasons care needs to be exercised in comparing sites on the economic impact numbers. Smaller on-site impacts may not be a bad news story.

Table 6.4 summarises economic effects associated with ST sites. Penllegare Valley Woods was estimated to have received 78,500 visitors between January 2011 and December 2011. The GVA supported by trips of which this site was a part was around £0.638m and with linked tourism spending supporting an estimated 28 FTE jobs. On-site spending effects were £0.099m of GVA and 5 FTE jobs. Cognation questionnaires were collected for visits to a number of the South Wales Off-Road Cycling Centre of Excellence locations (Afan Forest Park, Bike Park Wales and Cwmcarn) in 2013. Here, on-site spending effects were an estimated £1.323m of GVA and 58 FTE jobs. Taken together the 5 ST sites surveyed (Afan Forest Park was surveyed twice, being part of Cognation) could be connected to tourism visits in Wales that contributed £9.52m of GVA and that supported 426 FTE jobs directly and indirectly. There may be the possibility of double-counting in the total trip figures as visitors to one site may have visited another ST site. However, analysis of visitor travel and dwell-time data suggests the number of such multi-ST project-destination trips is relatively small.

The GVA attributable to on-site spending across the five ST project sites per year was £2,212,600 and 107 FTE jobs supported directly and indirectly by on-site visitor consumption.

59

Table 6.4 Sustainable Tourism Project –SITE Surveys Economic ImpactPenllegare

Valley Woods 2012

Cwmdonkin 2012 Scolton 2012

Aberglasney 2013

Afan Forest Park 2012

Cognation 2013 Site Average

Type Site Site Site Site Site Site Site

Annual Visitors 78,500 52,020 27,700 29,244 61,247 141,481 65,032

Dates for visitors Jan'11-Dec'11 Apr'11-Mar'12 Oct'11-Sep'12 Nov'11-Oct'12 Jan'11-Dec'11 Jan'13-Dec'13

Questionnaires completed 95 50 100 50 161 427 147

Number in respondents' parties n/a 135 388 114 474 1,631 548

Staying away from home in Wales 3.0% 7.3% 49.4% 71.4% 31.0% 21.1% 30.5%

Economic Impact

Total Trip

Gross Value Added £638,000 £895,700 £1,345,900 £2,605,000 £1,910,100 £4,037,000 £1,905,283

Supported employment - FTE 28 40 60 116 86 182 85

GVA to create each job £22,786 £22,676 £22,432 £22,457 £22,210 £22,181 £22,457

Trips to create job 2,804 1,317 462 252 712 777 1,054

Total trip GVA per visitor £8.13 £17.22 £48.59 £89.08 £31.19 £28.53 £37.12

Directly attributable to site

Gross Value Added £99,000 £109,000 £106,600 £575,000 £699,300 £1,323,000 £485,317

Employment FTEs 5 6 6 32 31 58 23

GVA to create each job 22,000 18,167 18,702 17,969 22,558 22,810 £20,368

Visits to create job 17,444 8,670 4,860 914 1,976 2,439 6,051

On-site GVA per visitor £1.26 £2.10 £3.85 £19.66 £11.42 £9.35 £7.94

GVA per visitor} total trip: on-site 6.44 8.22 12.63 4.53 2.73 3.05 4.68

GVA to create job} total trip: on-site 1.04 1.25 1.20 1.25 0.98 0.97 1.10

60

6.5 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM SITE INITIATIVES THAT DID NOT CARRY OUT A SURVEY

Table 6.5 shows the estimated economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending at sites where visitor surveys were not undertaken. As noted above, average spend and economic impact details here were taken from similar sites that had been surveyed and an average figure applied to the non-surveyed site annual visitor number to generate economic impacts.

The estimated total visitor spending impact of ST initiatives that did not carry out a survey was £2,719,400 of value added per year; supporting around 125 FTE jobs.

Table 6.5 Estimated Economic Impact of non-surveyed ST E4G initiative sitesST Centre of Excellence Site Annual Visitor

NumberGVA £s FTE

One Historic Garden Bryngarw 171,923 465,000 25.2One Historic Garden Colby 35,200 95,200 5.2Eryri CoE North Wales All sites combined 198,509 1,856,000 81.4North Wales Cycling All sites combined 32,427 303,200 13.3TOTAL 438,059 2,719,400 125.1

No visitor volume data was received from the initiative based at Margam (One Historic Garden).

6.6 SUMMARY OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VISITOR SPENDING AT SUSTAINABLE TOURISM CENTRES OF EXCELLENCE


Table 6.6 Summary of On-Site Attributable Economic Impacts of ST SITE InitiativesGross Value Added


Employment(FTEs)


4,932,000 232

61

6.7 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VISITOR SPENDING AT EVENTS

Table 6.7 summarises economic effects associated with five surveyed Sustainable Tourism events. These impacts are a subset of the site impacts shown above, not additional, as visits from events have been included in site estimations.

The Halo 2011 event was particularly successful in terms of economic impacts- the GVA supported by visitor spending attributable to the event estimated to be £71,800 with this supporting an estimated 4 FTE jobs. The dominant driver of this impact was the relatively high proportion of visitors staying overnight in Wales away from home.

Taken together the five events supported £128,000 of GVA and with spending directly and indirectly supporting just over 7 FTE jobs.

62

Table 6.7 Sustainable Tourism Project – EVENT Surveys Economic Impact

Halo British Series 2011

ETAPE Bicycle Event 2011

OHG Bryngarw 2011

"Shakespeare…"

ETAPE Bicycle Event 2012

Chain Reaction 2012 Event Average

Visitor Numbers 2,310 1,000 175 903 490 976

Date25th/26th June

20118th/9th Oct

201126th-28th July

2011 9th Sept 2012 15th Sept 2012

Questionnaires completed 95 75 50 103 57 76

Number in respondents' parties 288 211 153 198 136 197

Staying away from home in Wales 91.1% 36.1% 0.0% 77.2% 63.2% 53.5%

Economic Impact

Directly attributable to event

Gross Value Added £71,800 £23,040 £325 £23,320 £9,600 £25,617

Employment FTEs 4 1.2 0.02 1.4 0.6 1.4

GVA to create each job 17,950 19,200 16,250 17,022 16,842 £17,453

Visits to create job 578 833 8,750 659 860 2,336

On-site GVA per visitor £31.08 £23.04 £1.86 £25.83 £19.59 £20.28

63

6.8 THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM PROJECT CAPITAL SPENDING


It is stressed that what follows is an estimate of the employment associated with the capital spending of the ST E4G project from inception to end. The estimates in Table 6.8 are reported as a range based on different regional sourcing assumptions. There is also here no attempt to differentiate different types of construction activity i.e. the spending is assumed to be connected to an average construction type activity in Wales. The framework of the Welsh Input-Output tables was used to estimate the indirect effects associated with the spending.

Table 6.8 reveals that the total estimated construction spend associated with the ST E4G project was an estimated £13.724m. Taking the mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing, we estimate that once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account that some £9.9m of value added is supported in Wales and around 230 jobs6. Put another way if the construction activity bridged a period of three years, the E4G spending would have supported around 75 construction jobs and jobs in the construction supply chain over this three year period, and around £3.3m of value added per annum. However, the table also reveals that if local sourcing of the construction industry inputs averaged just 60% then a total of around £7.4m of value would have been supported and around 175 person years of employment. Care should be taken in interpreting these figures as they are not necessarily new jobs, but may be supporting already existing employment.

Table 6.8 Estimated Value Added and Employment Supported by ST E4G Capital Spending to project completion



100% 12.4 29080% 9.9 23060% 7.4 175

NOTE 1: Sustainable Tourism project whole project capital spend to completion estimated at £13.724m.NOTE 2: The employment estimate numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5.

6.9 SUSTAINABLE TOURISM PROJECT WEFO OUTPUTS6 This is 12 months of employment

64

Table 6.9 outlines the WEFO targets and outputs related to the Sustainable Tourism project as received by WERU from Visit Wales.

Table 6.9 Sustainable Tourism Project WEFO Outputs

Output TargetAchieved to

date Left to claimGross jobs created 53 59 0Visits 917,178 1,668,654 0Enterprises assisted 55 44 11Initiatives developing the natural and/ or historic environment 13 12 1Managed access to countryside or coast (km) 428 403.04 25.16

7. VALLEYS REGIONAL PARK ECONOMIC IMPACT

65

The overarching purpose of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work is to better understand the economic effects levered by both improvements to E4G sites, and visitation to E4G sponsored events. This section covers the estimation of the economic impact of the E4G Valleys Regional Park (VRP) strategic project from November 2009 to March 2014.

SUMMARY

The economic impacts that are attributable to the VRP programme take place largely away from the visitor sites themselves (e.g. spending occurs in shops and on accommodation etc. in local towns). The analysis therefore looked at all trip related spending whether at, or away from the visitor sites.

Details of 48 initiatives in VRP were included in the analysis. A total of 18 visitor surveys were carried out (11 at sites; 7 at specific events); with a combined 1,733 individual questionnaires completed.

Visitor volume estimates were combined with data from the visitor surveys and modelling of the indirect impacts of visitors spending to provide a gauge of individual initiatives overall economic impact.

For sites where surveys were not carried out estimations of their economic impact were derived. Average spends and economic impact details were taken from similar sites that had been surveyed and an average figure applied to the non-surveyed site annual visitor number to generate economic impacts.

ECONOMIC IMPACT

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending with initiative sites it is estimated that in total they could be connected with impacts of £1,736,000 of gross value added (GVA) per year and with this supporting employment of 87.3 full-time equivalents (FTEs).

o Surveyed sites: GVA £1,074,000 per year; 54.7 FTEso Non-surveyed sites estimate: GVA £662,000 per year; 32.6 FTEs

The economic effects associated with events were estimated to have supported £73,000 of GVA and with spending directly and indirectly supporting 3.5 full-time equivalent jobs.

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending the VRP has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending (construction type activity). Total estimated construction expenditure associated with the VRP project was £14.2m. Taking a mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing it is estimated that, once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account, that some £10.3m of value added is supported in Wales and around 240 jobs.

7.1 INTRODUCTION

66

This section reports the estimated economic impact of spending arising from visitation to individual sites and events surveyed during the E4G project. Then economic impact estimates are provided for initiatives that were not surveyed but for which annual visitor numbers were submitted to the Cardiff research team. Here proxy data on spending from similar E4G initiatives was incorporated.

7.2 SCOPE OF VRP E4G INITIATIVES


The overarching project data also provided the evaluators with information used to develop typologies of initiatives, and to inform the numbers of initiatives which required more detailed surveys on top of simple volume counts. Table 7.1 lists the 48 initiatives that returned e-flyers for the Valleys Regional Park E4G strategic project.

Table 7.1 List of VRP Initiatives (e-flyers received)VALLEYS REGIONAL PARK INITIATIVE VRP CODE

Aberdulais Falls Your Heritage VRP EP001046/ VRP EP001012-N005

Amman Valley Trotting Club - Landscaped Gateways VRPEP001035/ao0125gw

Blaen Bran Community Wood - Access and Environmental Improvements

Caerphilly interpretation (inc Aberbargoed grasslands)

Coed Gwilym Park

Connecting the Heritage VRP EP001012/M003

Craig y Ddinas Recreational area improvement VRP EP0001050

Crossing the mountain VRP EP001014

Crwydro'r Cymoedd Western Valleys Ref - WV168.016

Cwm Garw Fechan Environmental Improvements VRP EP001067

Cwmbran Riverside Park

Cwmcarn Forest Development EP001040

Cyd Terrace and Ynysbwllog Aqueduct VRP EP001015

Cyfarthfa Heritage Area - Cyfarthfa Heritage Unearthed VRP EP001033

Cynon Valley River Park VRP EP00128

Dare Valley Country Park Phase II VRP EP001029

Ebbw Fach Trail VRP EP001017

Ebbw Fach Trail - Hafod Arch VRP EP 001016

Ebbw Fach Trail - signage and interpretation project VRP EP001012\B004

Environmental Resource Centre VRP EP001042/326091

Environmental Resource Centre 2

Forgotten Landscapes - Interpretation Blaenavon World Heritage Centre

Forgotten Landscapes - Landscape Scale Partnership Project

67

Garth Farm VRP EP001030 Garth Farm

Gnoll Country park Access Project VRP EP001031/ EP001012-N002

Go Wild! (Phase 1 2010) VRPEP001012/B002

Greenmeadow Community Farm Environmental Improvements

Heritage Audio Trails and Interpretation VRP EP 0001012/R002

Kidwelly Industrial Museum: Bringing the History of the Past to Life VRP EP 001012/C003

Kidwelly Quay and Kymer's canal Phase 1 VRP EP001012/C004

Kidwelly Quay and Kymers Canal Phase 2 VRP EP001065

Lower Lliw Café VRP EP001049

Lower Rhondda Valley Green Corridor VRP EP001032

Merthyr Tydfil's Heritage Trails Interpretation Project VRP EP001012/M002

Parc Cwm Darran enhancement programme VRP EP001041

Parc Slip Visitor Centre Redevelopment

Parc Taf Bargoed Southern Gateway VRP EP001033

Parc Taff Bargoed Signage and Interpretation VRP EP001012\M004

Parc Tondu Heritage Connections EP001012/G101

ParcTaf Bargoed: Treharris Gateway VRP EP001045

Pen y Fan Pond Country Park VRP EP001020

Penallta Community Park new entrance VRP EP001019

Pontymoel Basin Environmental Improvements

Sirhowy Sculpture

Sirhowy Valley Landscape Partnership - Phase 1 VRP EP 001035

Tonypandy 2010 & Cordell Festival VRP EP 0001012/R001

Valleys Cycle Network

Valleys Cycle Network VRP Art Project VRP EP001012 / S001

For the 48 individual initiatives of which the research team have data for, Table 7.2 indicates the total initial level of external and leveraged investment. Table 7.2 shows that there was an estimated total spend associated with these initiatives of around £14.67m, of which £5.99m represents ERDF support, and with an average intervention rate of 41%. The average expenditure associated with a Valleys Regional Park E4G initiative is £305,560.

Table 7.2 Summary of Valleys Regional Park Initiatives from E-Flyer ReturnsNumber of E4G



aid £sValleys Regional Park Project 48 14,666,784 5,988,314

7.3 ECONOMIC IMPACT VISITOR SURVEYS CARRIED OUT AS PART OF THE VRP E4G PROJECT

68

Table 7.3 shows the 18 visitor surveys that were carried out by Valleys Regional Park initiatives. A total of 1,733 individual questionnaires were completed at 11 sites and 7 events.

Table 7.3 VRP Visitor Surveys undertaken


completed


Six Bells 2010 138 EventCordell Event 2010 102 EventDare Valley 2010 100 SiteParty in the Past 2010 59 EventTurner Exhibition 2010 40 EventPen Y Fan 2010 100 SitePen Y Fan 2011 100 SiteWelsh Waterways 2011 121 EventCwmbran Big Event 2011 107 EventThe Big V Festival 2011 46 EventParc Taf Bargoed 2011 1 34 SiteParc Cwm Darran 2011 107 Site

Valleys Cycle Network2 2011 196 SitesLower Rhondda Valley Green Corridor (Barry Sidings) 2011/2012 103 Site

Parc Penallta 2012 100 SiteCaerphilly Mountain 2012 100 SiteKidwelly Quay 2012 100 SiteParc Taf Bargoed 2012/2013 80 Site

1,733NOTE 1: The site sample size for Parc Taf Bargoed 2011 was too small to attempt an economic impact assessment. Only the 2012/2013 survey at Parc Taf Bargoed appears in the result shown below in Table 7.4.NOTE 2: The Valleys Cycle Network survey numbers includes only the cycling questionnaires completed by SUSTRANS.

7.4 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VRP SITE INITIATIVES CARRYING OUT A VISITOR SURVEY


69

The economic impact information in Table 7.4 is presented in two panels. First, the tables provide an estimate of the E4G site/event visitor total trip impact. Here for example the visit to an E4G site might only take up one day of a three day visit. However, we account for the economic impact associated with the whole trip. The E4G site clearly represents just part of the visit but it is important to consider the type and impact of tourism in Wales that E4G is helping to lever. The second panel provides an estimate of the economic effects associated with the visit to the E4G site/event itself and is classified as an on-site impact. These are the effects associated with visitor spending at the site, and those directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors). It is possible that where visitors to E4G sites visited more than one initiative on their trip on a particular day, or were surveyed on their way to a site or event (e.g. on the Valleys Cycle Network), then there is the possibility of double-counting their economic impact. However, after examining data on wider trip characteristics and the length of time spent at one E4G site, in the case of the Valleys Regional Park initiatives we do not believe that the magnitude of error caused is of the first order.



Table 7.4 summarises economic effects associated with Valleys Regional Park sites. Dare Valley was estimated to have received 142,000 visitors between October 2009 and September 2010. The GVA supported by trips of which Dare Valley was a part was around £4.4m and with linked tourism spending supporting an estimated 190 FTE jobs. In the case of Dare Valley, on-site effects were a small proportion of total trip effects. Just £0.28m of GVA was supported by the on-site spending and 15 FTE jobs. Pen y Fan survey results were available for 2010 and 2011. For the two years there are similarities in the GVA and employment supported by trips of which visit to Pen y Fan were a part. In 2011 an estimated £0.51m of GVA was supported and 22 FTE jobs. However, economic activity supported by on site spending differed markedly between 2010 and 2011. It is noted that in the case

70

of Pen y Fan survey returns represent a small element of the visitor population and with results here possibly sensitive to just a few returns.

Many E4G initiatives do not relate wholly to specific sites, but rather to the improvement of access links and routes to or through the countryside. A specific questionnaire (F8) was designed by the Cardiff University research team with the intention of addressing issues around the use of new access links to the countryside. This questionnaire was used for the Lower Rhondda Green Corridor initiative (with the survey being undertaken at Barry Sidings). Automatic people counter data enabled an estimation of 292,000 annual visits. The GVA associated with the trips of which the Lower Rhondda Green Corridor was a part was £1.50m, and with this amount of tourism consumption in Wales estimated to support 64 FTE jobs. The on-site impacts are much smaller reflecting the nature of this site. The GVA attributable to on-site spending was £84,000 and with this supporting an estimated 3.3 FTE jobs in Wales directly and indirectly.

Taken together the nine VRP sites surveyed (Pen Y Fan was surveyed twice) could be connected to tourism visits in Wales that contributed £12.3m of GVA and that supported 540 FTE jobs directly and indirectly. There may be the possibility of double-counting in the total trip figures as visitors to one site may have visited another VRP site. However, no data exists on the magnitude of these visits and the research team do not believe that the quantity of such visits would represent a major factor in the estimations.

The GVA attributable to on-site spending across the nine VRP initiatives per year was £1,074,000 and 54.7 FTE jobs supported directly and indirectly by on-site visitor consumption.

71

Table 7.4 Valleys Regional Park –SITE Surveys Economic Impact

Dare Valley

2010Pen Y Fan

2010Pen Y Fan

2011

Parc Cwm Darran

2011

Valleys Cycle

Network 2011

Lower Rhondda

Valley GreenCorr 2011/2012

Parc Penallta

2012

Caerphilly Mountain

2012

Kidwelly Quay 2012

Parc Taf Bargoed

2012/ 2013

Site Average

Visitor Numbers 142,00

0 80,00

0 81,00

0 120,000 121,982 292,000 85,000 80,000 33,460 229,000 126,444

DateOct'09-Sep'10

Jan'10-Dec'10

Nov'10-Oct'11

Jan'11- Dec'11

Jan'11- Dec'11

Apr'11- Mar'12

Jan'12- Dec'12

Jan'12- Dec'12

Jan'12- Dec'12

May'12- Apr'13

Questionnaires completed 100 10

0 10

0 108 196 103 100 100 100 80 109

Number in respondents' parties 332 26

1 24

4 458 198 191 216 217 128 249Staying away from home in Wales 33.0% 1.0% 1.0% 8.3% 1.0% 1.0% 7.0% 5.1% 6.8% 7.1%

Economic ImpactTotal TripGross Value Added £4,367,000 £435,900 £514,000 £1,335,000 £1,497,000 £660,000 £823,000 £303,650 £2,881,000 £1,424,061

Supported employment - FTE 190.0 19.

0 22.

0 59.0 64.0 29.

0 36.

0 13.

3 128.0 62.

0GVA to create each job £22,984 £22,942 £23,364 £22,627 £23,391 £22,759 £22,861 £22,831 £22,508 £22,918

Trips to create job 747 4,21

1 3,68

2 2,034 4,563 2,93

1 2,22

2 2,51

6 1,789 2,74

4Total trip GVA per visitor £30.75 £5.45 £6.35 £11.13 £5.13 £7.76 £10.29 £9.08 £12.58 £10.95

Directly attributable to siteGross Value Added £280,000 £54,500 £18,800 £90,400 £196,500 £84,000 £66,150 £210,000 £44,350 £66,100 £111,080Employment FTEs 15 3 1 4.8 10 3.3 3.3 11 1.8 3.5 5.7GVA to create each job £18,667 £18,167 £18,800 £18,833 £19,650 £25,455 £20,045 £19,091 £24,639 £18,886 £20,223

Visits to create job 9,467 26,66

7 81,00

0 25,00

0 12,19

8 88,48

5 25,75

8 7,27

3 18,58

9 65,42

9 35,98

6On-site GVA per visitor £1.97 £0.68 £0.23 £0.75 £1.61 £0.29 £0.78 £2.63 £1.33 £0.29 £1.06

GVA per visitor (total trip: on-site) 15.60 8.00 27.34 14.77 17.82 9.98 3.92 6.85 43.59 10.33GVA to create job(total trip:on-site) 1.23 1.26 1.24 1.20 0.92 1.14 1.20 0.93 1.19 1.13

Note 1: Small size sample for Parc Taf Bargoed necessitated use of proxy data to estimate economic impact. Note 2: Valleys Cycle Network surveys were carried out & analysed by SUSTRANS72

7.5 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VRP SITE INITIATIVES THAT DID NOT CARRY OUT A SURVEY

Table 7.5 shows the estimated economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending at sites where visitor surveys were not undertaken. As noted above average spend and economic impact details here were taken from similar sites that had been surveyed and an average figure applied to the non-surveyed site annual visitor number to generate economic impacts.

The estimated total visitor spending impact of VRP initiatives that did not carry out a survey was £662,000 of value added per year; supporting around 32.6 FTE jobs.

Table 7.5 Estimated Economic Impact of non-surveyed VRP E4G initiative sitesE4G Initiative Type/Activity Annual Visitor

NumberGVA FTE

Blaen Bran Community Wood "1.2 walking trail" "5.1 country park"

35,208 23,149 1.1

Cwmbran Riverside Park "5.1 country park""6.1 family activities""5.5 river canal stream"

246,000 191,445 9.5

Forgotten Landscapes "5.1 country park" 34,134 16,800 0.8Greenmeadow Community Farm Environmental Improvements

"4.5 rural heritage""5.1 country park"

60,833 62,460 3.2

Pontymoel Basin Environmental Improvements

"5.5 river canal stream""1.2 walking trail"

142,770 61,132 2.8

Cwmcarn Forest Development "1.2 walking trail""5.1 country park"

39,959 26,273 1.3

Craig y Ddinas Recreational area improvement

"1.2 walking trail" 21,587 9,084 0.4

Cyd Terrace and Ynysbwllog Aqueduct "5.5 river canal stream" 24,050 10,875 0.4Environmental Resource Centre "5.1 country park" 1,927 1,500 0.1Ebbw Fach Trail "1.1 Cycle route"

"1.2 walking trail"272,643 217,332 10.9

Ebbw Fach Trail - Hafod Arch "1.2 walking trail" 8,186 3,445 0.2Cwm Garw Fechan Environmental Improvements

"1.2 walking trail" 10,500 4,419 0.2

Sirhowy Valley Landscape Partnership "1.2 walking trail" 12,754 5,367 0.3Amman Valley Trotting Club - Landscaped Gateways

“6.4 riding” / events 10,000 24,697 1.3

Cyfarthfa Heritage Area - Cyfarthfa Heritage Unearthed

"1.2 walking trail" 8,622 3,628 0.2

929,173 661,606 32.6

Cynon Valley River Park submitted automatic counter data but here there were concerns with the accuracy of the counts. No visitor volume data was received from the initiatives based at: Lower Lliw Café; Coed Gwilym Park; Parc Slip Visitor Centre; Gnoll Country Park Access Project; Garth Farm; and Crwydro’r Cymoedd.

73

No visitor spending economic impact estimates were produced for initiatives that were wholly or mainly to do with interpretation. The impact here was deemed to be largely directed at the quality of visit rather than spend levels and there are a number of difficulties in assessing ‘visitor numbers’ for these initiatives. Furthermore, a number of the interpretation initiatives were linked to other VRP E4G initiatives for which economic impact estimates have been produced (e.g. Parc Taf Bargoed Signage and Interpretation with Parc Taf Bargoed Southern Gateway and Parc Taf Bargoed Treharris Gateway).

7.6 SUMMARY OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VISITOR SPENDING AT VRP INITIATIVES

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending associated with site initiatives (surveyed and non-surveyed, outlined in sections 7.4 and 7.5 above) it is estimated that in total they could be connected with on-site impacts of £1,736,000 of GVA per year and with this supporting employment of 87.3 full-time equivalents (Table 7.6).

Table 7.6 Summary of On-Site Attributable Economic Impacts of VRP SITE InitiativesGross Value Added


Employment(FTEs)

Surveyed sites 1,074,000 54.7Non-surveyed sites 662,000 32.6

1,736,000 87.3

7.7 ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VISITOR SPENDING AT EVENTS

Table 7.7 summarises economic effects associated with seven surveyed Valleys Regional Park events and one event (Go Wild!) that was not surveyed but where proxy data was used to calculate the economic impact, given the visitor numbers.

In the case of three of the surveyed events (Party in the Past, Turner Exhibition and the Big V Festival) the small sample sizes and sparse spend data captured necessitated that proxy data from other E4G events with a similar visitor profile were used to estimate the economic impacts. Here average spend per day visitor (all events surveyed) and average spend per overnight visitor (all events surveyed) were calculated and applied separately to the breakdown found at the three events. The assumption here is that the dominant driver of spend is whether visitors were staying overnight or not.

Taken together the eight events supported £73,339 of GVA and with spending directly and indirectly supporting just over 3.5 FTE jobs.

74

Table 7.7 Valleys Regional Park –EVENT Surveys Economic Impact

Six Bells Event 2010

Cordell Event 2010

Party in the Past1

2010

Turner Exhibition1

2010

Welsh Waterways

2011

Cwmbran Big Event

2011

The Big V Festival1

2011

Surveyed Event

Average

Non-surveyed

event estimate: Go

Wild! 2010

Visitor Numbers 7,500 1,568 800 14,782 1,676 7,000 250 4,436 3,000

Date28th

Jun'1018/19th

Sep'1012th

Sep'101st-31st Aug’ 10

28th-30th May'11 16th Jul'11

17th Aug'11

Phase 1, 2010

Questionnaires completed 138 102 59 40 121 107 46 117 n/aNumber in respondents' parties 424 502 200 59 355 405 163 422 n/a

Staying away from home in Wales 13.5% 4.9% 3.4% 2.6% 14.0% 1.9% 4.9% 8.6% n/a

Economic Impact

Directly attributable to eventGross Value Added £32,000 £3,350 £1,685 £10,246 £5,950 £16,000 £316 £14,325 £3,792Employment FTEs 1.5 0.16 0.08 0.46 0.27 0.90 0.01 0.70 0.16GVA to create each job £21,333 £20,938 £21,063 £22,274 £22,037 £17,778 £31,600 £20,521 £23,700

Visits to create job 5,00

0 9,80

0 10,00

0 32,13

5 6,20

7 7,77

8 25,00

0 7,196 18,75

0On-site GVA per visitor £4.27 £2.14 £2.11 £0.69 £3.55 £2.29 £1.26 £3.06 £1.26

NOTE 1: Economic impact for Party in the Past, Turner Exhibition and The Big V Festival was informed by all-event average spending of ‘daytrippers’ and ‘overnight stayers

75

7.8 CONNECTED NOTABLE ASPECTS OF THE VRP PROGRAMME

Worthy of note are the activities of two schemes that have each played a part in the successes achieved by the VRP programme.

Community Tourism Programme Ambassador Scheme – Free of charge training was openly provided to people living or working within the VRP area to become visitor guides, with the prospect that some might go on to develop tourism service enterprises in the locality. The major aim of the scheme was to promote community engagement in the locality and help provide a better customer service for the visitor.

By April 2014 there were 543 people from 160 different private, public and volunteer organisations that had completed at least one of the ‘Ambassador’ workshops (“Our Place” or “World Host”). These organisations included 48 individual visitor attractions in the area. Participants have come from a wide range of backgrounds (taxi drivers, school teachers, ex-miners, park wardens etc.) and have achieved a NQF Level 2 BTEC qualification.

Individuals trained included unemployed, economically inactive, and retired people. The Community Tourism Ambassador Scheme was also able to link into other VRP activities. Businesses participating in the We-Fund-the-Valleys initiative first became involved in the VRP programme through sending staff on the Ambassador Scheme.

From April 1st 2014 the scheme was successfully made a social enterprise with the remit of delivering Ambassador training, contracted through local stakeholders, across Wales to business and communities.

[Source: The Valleys Regional Park Final Evaluation Report, Cardiff University]

The Valleys Heart and Soul Marketing Campaign - With the primary aim of raising the profile of the Valleys Regional Park as a visitor destination, the Valleys Heart and Soul marketing programme has undertaken a wide variety of activities. These include: establishing a visitor website (www.thevalleys.co.uk); undertaking a two phased marketing campaign; producing a Valleys marketing brochure and newsletters; carrying out a PR and social media plan; and undertaking visitor research.

Campaign funding was principally directed at the marketing campaign which aspired to reach the distinct groups of independent explorers in the southern part of the UK, and friends/ family in other parts of south Wales. Visitor research involved purchasing additional interviews as part of the Visit Wales Visitor Survey 2013 (725 face to face VRP area interviews were completed).

The Valleys Heart and Soul Marketing Campaign Phase 2 Evaluation Report (covering the period September 2012 to March 2014) noted that visitors to the VRP area scored an overall trip satisfaction rating of 9.3 out of 10, equalling the all-Wales average score.

76

Particularly high scores were achieved for the ‘quality of the natural environment’ and ‘friendliness of people’, and the report indicates the relatively high proportion of parties who were ‘families with young children, but not older children’ matching the area’s offering to families.

Feedback from Strategic Marketing (commissioned by the VRP campaign) notes that the research, encompassing satisfaction ratings, visitor profiles and open comments suggested that the marketing messages had been successful.

7.9 THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VALLEYS REGIONAL PARK CAPITAL SPENDING


It is stressed that what follows is an estimate of the employment associated with the capital spending of the VRP E4G project from inception to end. The estimates in Table 7.8 are reported as a range based on different regional sourcing assumptions. There is also here no attempt to differentiate different types of construction activity i.e. the spending is assumed to be connected to an average construction type activity in Wales. The framework of the Welsh Input-Output tables was used to estimate the indirect effects associated with the spending.

Table 7.8 reveals that the total estimated construction spend associated with the VRP E4G project was an estimated £14.2m. Taking the mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing, we estimate that once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account that some £10.3m of value added is supported in Wales and around 240 jobs7. Put another way if the construction activity bridged a period of three years, the E4G spending would have supported around 80 construction jobs and jobs in the construction supply chain over this three year period, and around £3.43m of value added per annum. However, the table also reveals that if local sourcing of the construction industry inputs averaged just 60% then a total of around £7.7m of value would have been supported and around 175 person years of employment. Care should be taken in interpreting these figures as they are not necessarily new jobs, but may be supporting already existing employment.


Table 7.8 Estimated Value Added and Employment Supported by VRP E4G Capital Spending to project completion



100% 12.8 30080% 10.3 24060% 7.7 175

NOTE 1: Valleys Regional Park whole project capital spend to completion estimated at £14.2m.NOTE 2: The employment estimate numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5.

7.10 INTERPRETATION INITIATIVES

It is more challenging to attempt any measurement of the economic impact of initiatives that were interpretation based. These interpretation encompass a number of activities including: the installation of information panels and ‘fingerposts’; websites; leaflets to market initiatives; downloadable audio trails etc.

They therefore attempt to address more the quality side of the visitor experience and it is more difficult to justify estimating visitor spending impacts associated. Furthermore, a number of the interpretation initiatives link in with sites that were surveyed (e.g. Ebbw Fach Trail; Parc Taf Bargoed; and the Valleys Cycle Network) and where economic impact has already been estimated.

Table 7.9 lists the VRP interpretation initiatives as part of the E4G project.

Table 7.9 List of VRP Interpretation InitiativesVRP InitiativeAberdulais Falls Your HeritageCaerphilly interpretation (inc. Aberbargoed grasslands)Connecting the HeritageEbbw Fach Trail - signage and interpretation projectHeritage Audio Trails and InterpretationKidwelly Industrial Museum: Bringing the History of the Past to LifeMerthyr Tydfil's Heritage Trails Interpretation ProjectParc Taff Bargoed Signage and InterpretationParc Tondu Heritage ConnectionsSirhowy SculptureValleys Cycle Network VRP Art Project

A short example of an interpretation initiative, for which details were received by the research team, follows to illustrate the type of data and outputs that may be available.

Case Study: Heritage Audio Trails and Interpretation –

78

Managed by Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council, the aim of this initiative was to enhance the interpretation of heritage in the local area by producing downloadable audio trails. These were added to an existing website ( www.heritagetrailsrct.co.uk ). A complete set of audio trails were available from December 2011.

The statistics for 2013 indicated 43,008 individual visits to the website, from which it was estimated by the website managers that 1.6% resulted in a listen to or download of an audio trail- that is 688 listens or downloads. Although it is not possible to tell how many of these resulted in an actual visit to undertake an audio trail there is a potential beneficial promotional effect of the audio trails being listened to and subsequently encouraging visitation.

8. WALES COAST PATH ECONOMIC IMPACT

79

The overarching purpose of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work is to better understand the economic effects levered by both improvements to E4G sites, and visitation to E4G sponsored events. This section covers the estimation of the economic impact of the E4G Wales Coast Path (WCP) strategic project from October 2012 to September 2013 (Convergence Area only).

SUMMARY The economic impacts that are attributable to the Wales Coast Path take place largely away

from the Path itself (e.g. spending occurs in shops and on accommodation etc. in local towns). The analysis therefore looked at all trip related spending whether on, or away, from the path.

These added complexities in measuring the economic impact make it difficult for tourism locations such as the Path to match up against traditional public sector interventions, and win continued support. Despite this there is a need generated by funding requirements to evaluate the economic value of the Path and highlight its benefits.

ECONOMIC IMPACT

There were an estimated 1.74 million visits to the Wales Coast Path in the Convergence Area between October 2012 and September 2013; 1.47 million of these were by adults (defined as those aged 16 years or over).

Gross expenditure by adult visitors on these trips was estimated at £23.54m.

In the Convergence area section of the Wales Coast Path the annual overall impacts were estimated as:

o £23.5m of additional demand in the Welsh economy o £11.8m of gross value added , ando 535 person-years of employment.

8.1 INTRODUCTION

80

This section reports the estimated economic impact of spending arising from visitation to the Wales Coast Path (Convergence Area) from visitor data collected in surveys and by people counters during the E4G programme. It is assumed that WCP economic impacts are additional to those of the other strategic projects (it is thought unlikely in most instances that people visiting a stretch of the coastal path will go on to visit another E4G site).

8.2 SCOPE OF THE WALES COAST PATH E4G CONVERGENCE AREA


The overarching project data also provided the evaluators with information used to develop typologies of initiatives, and to inform the sites which required more detailed surveys on top of simple volume counts. Table 8.1 lists the 10 local authorities with sections of Coast Path covered by the E4G strategic project.

Table 8.1 List of Wales Coast Path Local Authorities Covered by the Convergence AreaLocal Authority AreaAngleseyBridgendCarmarthenshireCeredigionConwyDenbighshireGwyneddNeath Port TalbotPembrokeshireSwansea

For the overall project, Table 8.2 indicates the total initial level of external and leveraged investment. Table 8.2 shows that there was an estimated total spend associated with the project of around £8.67m, of which £3.90m represents ERDF support, and with an average intervention rate of 45%.

Table 8.2 Summary of Wales Coast Path Project Spend from E-Flyer ReturnNumber of E4G



aid £sWales Coast Path (Convergence Area ) 1 8,662,000 3,898,000

81

8.3 DATA SOURCES

Visitor volume estimates were combined with data from visitor surveys and modelling of the indirect impacts of visitor spending to provide a gauge of the project’s overall economic impact. The estimates of visit numbers to the Path were supplied by Local Authorities and National Parks.

Visitor numbers were collected through automatic people counters at locations around the whole of the Welsh coast. The visitor surveys, which were carried out by Beaufort Research at 56 different interview sites, provided data on the spending of respondents (including major items such as food and drink, travel and accommodation) and type of visit (day-trip or overnight).

Figure 8.1 Data Sources to Inform Direct Economic Effects of the Wales Coast Path

+

Automatic People Counter Data

Natural Resources Wales (NRW) supplied Cardiff Business School with visitor number data from each of the ten local authorities covered by the Wales Coast Path in the Convergence Area. The data was captured using automatic people counters. Where possible data was collected for the time period October 2012 to September 2013, so as to cover one whole year and be as up-to-date as possible for the research analysis. Where data was not available for this period, the newest available data for a one year period was used as a proxy.

It should be noted that concerns exist regarding the accuracy of visitor volumes estimated through the use of automatic people counters. Different types of counters are likely to produce different magnitudes of error. Also, there may be the possibility of double-counting users of the Path who are undertaking round trips on their return journey.

Expert opinion was sought by the research team from a small number of stakeholders for the Wales Coast Path regarding the usage of automatic people counters. This found that appropriate calibration processes were being used, and ‘manual’ observation checks were undertaken to ensure the accuracy of counts on the more established sections of the Path. Here also past work carried out on comparing automatic with manual counting was examined, with the overall numbers in this

82

Visitor Volume Data

Local Authorities and National Park Authorities data from automatic people counters installed throughout Wales on the Coast Path

Visitor Survey

Beaufort Research completed 1,566 questionnaires with Wales Coast Path users between October 2011 and August 2013.

Spending data from the 782 of these questionnaires completed between October 2012 and August 2013 was incorporated into the WERU study

analysis being shown to have a high degree of similarity between the two methods. The vast majority of the local authorities involved reported using the same company (Linetop), who are generally agreed to have a high level of expertise, particularly with regards to offering guidance on the appropriate placing of counters.

Due to the fact that it is impractical because of cost/time issues to have people counters on every section of path, there is likely overall to be an element of undercounting. Furthermore, a few local authorities were unable to report figures for every section in their locality due to broken or stolen counters. Rather than attempt to estimate for these ‘missing’ sections it was agreed to only use actual counter captured figures, giving a conservative, but more defendable estimate.

8.4 VISITOR SPENDING ECONOMIC IMPACT RESULTS

Following the methodology described previously this section presents the estimates of the direct spending associated with visitors to the Wales Coast Path. It then calculates the indirect economic effects associated with this spending.

Visitor Volumes- Visitor counter data received indicated that there were an estimated total of 1.74 million visits on the Wales Coast Path (Convergence Area sections) between October 2012 and September 2013. Table 8.3 shows the breakdown by local authority area.

Table 8.3 Visitor Volumes on the Wales Coast Path by local authority area (Oct 2012 to Sept 2013)Local Authority Area Visitor Counter Numbers on

Wales Coast PathAnglesey 93,217Bridgend 666,625Carmarthenshire 6,205Ceredigion 134,417Conwy 3,456Denbighshire 37,204Gwynedd 281,699Neath Port Talbot 43,242Pembrokeshire 98,162Swansea 375,423TOTAL 1,739,650Source: Automatic people counter data supplied by local authorities to NRW.

Combining the visitor counter data from Table 8.3 with survey data relating to make-up of party and type of stay (daytrip or overnight stay), an estimate of adult visitor numbers for the Convergence area of the Wales Coast Path were calculated. Table 8.4 highlights that an estimated 1.47 million visits were made by adults to sections of the Path in a Convergence Area.

83

Table 8.4 Visitors to the Wales Coast Path by Type and Area (Oct 2012 to Sept 2013)All Visits Adult Visits Adult Day Trips Adult Overnight Trips

Convergence Area 1,739,650 1,471,300 823,900 647,400Direct Spending

Day trips - Table 8.5 shows that average reported expenditure per adult day-tripper for their whole visit (on path and off) was £4.61 in the Convergence Area. Around £3.8m was estimated to be spent in Wales in total as part of day visits incorporating the Wales Coast Path.

Table 8.5 Expenditure by Adults on a Daytrip to the Wales Coast Path (Oct 2012 to Sept 2013)Adult

DaytripsAverage

Spend per Adult (£)

Gross Spend (£m)

Convergence Area 823,900 4.61 3.80

Overnight trips - It was estimated that there were 0.647 million overnight trips in Wales made by visitors to the Wales Coast Path in the Convergence Area. These involved some 2.59m staying nights and total expenditure of £79m. However, to calculate the proportion of this spending that could be attributed to the Wales Coast Path (rather than other visitor attractions the tourists may have visited) one night’s expenditure for each trip was assumed to be Path related.

Table 8.6 Expenditure by Adults visiting the Wales Coast Path who stayed overnight away from home in Wales (Oct 2012 to Sept 2013)

Adult Trips

Nights Spend (£m) Average spend per

night (£)

Wales Coast Path related spend (£m)

Convergence Area 647,400 2,590,800 79.01 30.50 19.74

By assuming that only one night’s expenditure is Wales Coast Path related the estimate for these visitors is possibly conservative. Based on these calculations a contribution of almost £20m was spent by Wales Coast Path visitors in Wales in the year to end of September 2013.

Summary of spending by visitors to the Wales Coast Path

The total volume of Wales Coast Path visitors and associated spending was then calculated from the data outlined above and is summarised in Table 8.7. It is estimated that the expenditure associated with the 1.47 million Wales Coast Path trips undertaken by adults between October 2012 and September 2013, was around £23.5m.

84

Table 8.7 Total trip volume and gross spending by visitors to the Coast Path in Wales Convergence Area (Oct 2012 to Sept 2013)

Volume of Trips (Adults)

Average expenditure per

adult (£)

Total Expenditure Wales Coast Path

related (£m)Day Trips 823,900 4.61 3.80Overnight 647,400 30.50 19.74Total 1,471,300 16.00 23.54It is the figures in Table 8.7 that become the basis for analysis of economy wide effects associated with this level of tourism consumption.

Economy wide effects of visitors to the Wales Coast Path

The direct spend of visitors to the Wales Coast Path between October 2012 and September 2013 is estimated at £23.5m. Some of this spending goes on goods and services that are imported into the Welsh economy, and some ‘leaks’ out in the form of taxes. The gross spending figure (£23.5m) was firstly discounted for leakages such as taxes (including VAT), and spending on goods and services that are imports to Wales. The Welsh Tourism Satellite Account was used to inform the levels of import propensity. For walking related goods bought in Wales but manufactured elsewhere (typically including jackets and boots), only a small element of the related spend is likely to be maintained in the region. Here only the retail profit margin will be kept in Wales.

The Tourism Impact Planning Model for Wales shows that, for day trip visitors in the region, around 35% of their expenditure is taken up by goods and services imported from the rest of the world (outside of the UK), and production taxes. These monies are therefore leaked out of the calculations for estimating the economic impact of visitors to the Wales Coast Path on Wales.Similarly, from the Tourism Impact Planning Model for Wales, around 25% of the monies spent by overnight stay visitors are shown to leak out of the Welsh economy (due to spending on non-Welsh goods and services, or taxes).

Once these leakages are removed, the remaining net expenditure resulting is an injection into the Welsh economy, which businesses receiving these monies then re-spend in successive indirect rounds (e.g. accommodation providers purchase goods and services from other Welsh sectors to meet the needs of their visitors, causing these suppliers to then purchase outputs from elsewhere, and so on). The resulting increase in the output of local providers, increases local wealth which in turn leads to increases in the levels of spending.

The overall economic impact is defined in terms of changes in output, gross value added (incomes), and employment that result in the economy. The size of these impacts depend upon the extent to which injections into the economy are retained regionally (so that the larger the propensity to spend on imported goods and services the smaller the amount that will be kept within the Welsh economy). This is expressed numerically by the multiplier coefficient. The lower the ability of the local economy to meet demand for goods and services, the higher the leakages (as spending takes place on imports), and the lower the multiplier.

85

Table 8.8 shows the short-term related expenditure impact of visitors to the Wales Coast Path on Wales. These activities resulted in an additional £23.5m of demand in the Welsh economy.Some of this additional output does not add to Welsh employment or incomes (e.g. cost of goods and services inputs) and the measure Gross Value Added (GVA) is a more appropriate metric for regional economic impact. The additional activity in the regional economy was associated with £11.8m of GVA (GVA is considered the most appropriate true measure of the value of economic activity, summing locally earned incomes, company profits and some taxes).

The indicative estimate of the employment impact that might be associated with visitors to the Wales Coast Path spending for Wales between October 2012 and September 2013 is around 535 person-years of employment.

Table 8.8 The Economic Impact of the Spending of Visitors to the Wales Coast Path Convergence Area (Oct 2012 to Sept 2013)

Convergence Area

Output (£millions) 23.5Gross Value Added (£millions) 11.8Employment (FTE*) 535*FTE = Full-Time Equivalents

8.5 THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF WALES COAST PATH PROJECT CAPITAL SPENDING

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending it is important to recognise that the Wales Coast Path Environment for Growth programme has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending, in large measure, on construction type activity. Within the Welsh European Funding Office guidelines the direct and indirect economic activity supported through capital spending cannot be included within any gross or new jobs created target. However, estimates of output and employment supported during E4G developmental activity should be included in a more general evaluation of the programmes impact. In particular, it is noted that selected project activity has taken place in more needy parts of the regional economy, such that employment and incomes supported in construction could have important local effects.

Table 8.8 reveals that the total estimated construction spend associated with the WCP Convergence Area E4G project was an estimated £6.015m. Taking the mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing, we estimate that once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account that some £4.4m of value added is supported in Wales and around 95 jobs8. Put another way if the construction activity bridged a period of three years, the E4G spending would have supported around 30 construction jobs and jobs in the construction supply chain over this three year period, and around £1.47m of value added per annum. However, the table also reveals that if local sourcing


of the construction industry inputs averaged just 60% then a total of around £3.3m of value would have been supported and around 75 person years of employment. Care should be taken in interpreting these figures as they are not necessarily new jobs, but may be supporting already existing employment.

Table 8.9 Estimated Value Added and Employment Supported by WCP (Convergence Area) E4G Capital Spending to project completion (end 2013)



100% 5.4 12580% 4.4 9560% 3.3 75

NOTE 1: Wales Coast Path Convergence Area whole project capital spend to completion estimated at £6.015m.NOTE 2: The employment estimate numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5.

9. CONCLUSIONS 87

9.1 IN SUMMARY: THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF E4G

The overarching purpose of the E4G monitoring and evaluation work is to better understand the economic effects levered by improvements to E4G sites, visitation to E4G sponsored events, and capital spending. The estimation of the economic impact of the E4G strategic projects covered the period from November 2009 to September 2015.

The economic impacts that are attributable to the E4G programme take place largely away from the visitor sites themselves (e.g. spending occurs in shops and on accommodation etc. in local towns). The analysis therefore looked at all trip related spending whether at the site or directly attributable to it (a single day’s impact e.g. including one night’s accommodation for staying visitors).

Details of the 6 strategic projects within the E4G programme in Wales were included in the analysis. A total of 85 visitor surveys were carried out; with a combined 12,125 individual questionnaires completed (Table 9.1).

Table 9.1 Surveys and responses by E4G Strategic Project

E4G Strategic Project Number of surveys


Communities and Nature(CAN) 14 2,589Coastal Tourism (CT) 12 1,146Heritage Tourism Project (HTP) 28 3,830Sustainable Tourism (ST) 11 1,261Valleys Regional Park (VRP) 18 1,733Wales Coast Path (WCP) 2 1,566

All E4G 85 12,125



For the overall E4G programme data collected from six E4G Strategic Projects (via e-flyers) Table 9.2 indicates the total initial level of external and leveraged investment. There was an

88

estimated total investment spend associated with the strategic projects of £90.6m, of which £39.3m represents ERDF support and with an average intervention rate of 43.4%.

Table 9.2 Summary of Initial Investment in E4G Strategic Projects

Strategic Project Number of Initiatives1,2


(£m)


(£m)

Communities and Nature (CAN) 61 12.5 4.9Coastal Tourism Project (CT) 5 18.8 8.7Heritage Tourism Project (HTP) 25 17.0 7.6Sustainable Tourism Project (ST) 4 18.9 8.2Valleys Regional Park (VRP) 48 14.7 6.0Wales Coast Path (WCP Convergence Area) 10 8.7 3.9

All E4G 153 90.6 39.3NOTE 1: Centre of Excellence or Project for CT; Centre of Excellence for ST; Local Authority for WCP.NOTE 2: Number of initiatives includes those that did not return an e-flyer

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF VISITOR SPENDING

Adding together the economic impacts directly attributable to visitor spending with initiative sites it is estimated that in total they could be connected with impacts of £51.8m of gross value added (GVA) per year and with this supporting employment of around 2,611 full-time equivalents (FTEs). (Table 9.3).

Table 9.3 Annual Site Economic Impact by E4G Strategic Project

89

E4G Strategic Project GVA (£s) generated

Employment (FTEs)

supported by site visitor

spending

Communities and Nature 5,829,000 313Coastal Tourism 8,118,000 399Heritage Tourism Project 19,363,000 1,045Sustainable Tourism 4,932,000 232Valleys Regional Park 1,736,000 87Wales Coast Path (Convergence) 11,800,000 535All E4G 51,778,000 2,611

ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CAPITAL SPENDING

As well as impacts in terms of leveraging tourism spending the E4G programme has also involved considerable amounts of capital spending (construction type activity). Total estimated construction expenditure associated with the E4G strategic projects was £72.79m. Taking a mid-range estimate of 80% local sourcing it is estimated that, once the multiplier effects of this construction spending are taken into account, that some £52.5m of value added is supported in Wales and around 1,225 jobs.

Table 9.4 Estimated Value Added and Employment Supported by E4G Capital Spending at Project CompletionProject and Local sourcing assumption Value Added (£m) Approx Employment

(FTE person years)*

Communities and Nature Whole project (£8.134m)100% 7.4 170

80% 5.8 13560% 4.4 100

Coastal Tourism Whole project (£14.813m)100% 13.3 320

80% 10.7 25560% 8.0 190

Heritage Tourism Project Whole project (£15.900m)100% 14.3 335

80% 11.4 27060% 8.6 200

Sustainable Tourism Whole project (£13.724m)100% 12.4 290

80% 9.9 23060% 7.4 175

Valleys Regional Park Whole project (£14.200m)100% 12.8 300

80% 10.3 24060% 7.7 175

Wales Coast Path Whole project (£6.015m)100% 5.4 125

80% 4.4 9560% 3.3 75

Total Whole project (£72.786m)100% 65.6 1540

80% 52.5 122560% 39.4 915

Note 1: The employment estimate numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5.

9.2 THE USES AND LIMITS OF ECONOMIC MODELLING

90

Wales is in an enviable position in terms of tourism statistics and intelligence. Consistent support over more than a decade for the development of the Tourism Satellite Account by Visit Wales, other elements of the Welsh Government and other stakeholders have resulted in a suite of analytical tools that is bespoke, holistic and policy relevant. Our understanding of regional tourism and its link to the economy and environment is amongst the best in the world.

The E4G project is an example of the usefulness of such tools. Tourism is a phenomenon that has impacts ranging widely over space and time, encompassing society, the economy and environment. This report catalogues the economic consequences of visitor activity consistently and comparably across 120 very different sites and projects, and in ways which reveal the wider benefit of those sites and investments. Geographically scattered activity can be compared economically with that at traditional centralised employment locations, using the same metrics and giving some idea of the benefits of tourism investment compared to other options. All this is enabled by a new and extensive source of standardised information on visitor behaviours – a source that is ripe for further exploitation.

This report also illustrates the limits of our analysis, summarised below

It is fairly crude in modelling terms, unable to identify impacts on the ‘supply side’ of tourism – price changes; new business start-ups and supply for example;

We can say little ‘formally’ about crowding out and displacement between sites and hence cannot treat our numbers as net additional impact (although our modelling assumptions are constructed to deal in part with these issues);

We cannot (yet) model innovative activities or approaches – for example if a project explicitly utilised sustainable or heritage building techniques or materials.

The possibility for addressing these limitations is well recognised in academia – but these avenues are all expensive and data-hungry. There is only a point to further expenditure and effort if the policy framework is receptive to the incorporation of resulting new learning.

9.3 ENGAGING STAKEHOLDERS

This project was notable for the mostly enthusiastic engagement of project managers in the area of visitor volume measurement and surveys, and at the same time the almost complete inability of the research team to gather any useful information from projects on energy use intended to enable a carbon-assessment of E4G (the exception here was Cadw who were able to supply timely and in-depth energy usage data for their sites in the HTP E4G initiative). This is despite the provision of straightforward data collection templates; the easy availability (for many sites) of relevant information; and our willingness to accept partial data.

91

This is very interesting. It suggests that project managers (the vast majority in the public sector) were unwilling or unable to engage in this new type of activity despite strong messaging from the E4G research and management teams, and despite a strong intuitive link to wider Welsh Government sustainability approaches and duties. The reasons for this may be worthy of further investigation.

A final point relates to the impact of the E4G structure on project managers and other stakeholders’ engagement, particularly its status as an EU funded set of capital investments and hence time limited, specifically proscribed and (in this case) with a conceptually too simple set of outcome metrics. Engagement and data collection was always seen as ‘one off’ (or ‘two off’) and we have limited evidence that the toolkits, approaches and learning developed as part of E4G will have any longer term implementation at projects or across the government more widely. We are not aware that any projects have restructured their data collection or analysis along E4G lines. The signalling by Welsh Government long before data collection had finished that future rounds of EU funding would downplay tourism was perhaps unhelpful.

In summary the E4G project has gone far beyond most EU evaluations in presenting a measure of economic impact that is both aggregate and micro-level; at project and programme level and in an integrated and comparable fashion – albeit with a number of methodological and data caveats. The approaches and new data sources and tools, together with the Tourism Impact Model for Wales have the potential to be policy useful in a variety of ways and for an extended period.

9.4 CONCLUDING REMARKS

As highlighted elsewhere in Section 9 of this report we believe the collected dataset contains a wealth of valuable data on visitor spending patterns and impacts at different sites and events. While the focus of the research has been on better understanding the regional economic activity supported by visits there are also opportunities here to use the information to develop typologies of E4G sites in terms of the economic activity they support and with this type of analysis potentially of use in informing and focusing marketing activity. This is particularly important because many of the sites fall under a different ‘marketing’ jurisdiction in terms of institutions. Where the objective is to maximise regional gains from promoting sites the data in the report could be a valuable aid in informing where joint promotional efforts could lever the largest gains.

While elements of the report touch directly on environmental issues there is much more to be done to examine the environmental consequences of the visits levered at the E4G sites and events. This will become more important as the E4G sites are managed and developed through an ecosystem services approach where the economic benefits levered are just one part of a decision making framework. Using the existing data and with a set of assumptions on underlying travel modes it would be possible in the future to examine the carbon consequences associated with this visitation.

92

report on the economic impact of the...

Documents