Responsible Recreation in British Columbia Parks andCampgrounds: The influence of novel communicationinterventions

Abstract: Introduction The demand across British Columbia (and Canada) for access to beautiful outdoor spaces and outdoor recreation opportunities has skyrocketed. Though demands were on the rise before the COVID-19 pandemic, the pandemic has only expedited the increase and visitation has stayed high into 2023 (Park People, 2022; BCMECC, 2022; Rice et al., 2021). The growing demand for outdoor recreation has led to specific management challenges for areas that are tasked with balancing recreation and conservation. This increase in visitation has many benefits both for human health and connections to nature, fostering nature-relatedness, and building a community of stewards of parks, protected areas, and natural spaces. However, this increase in visitation also creates impacts on the natural environment, such as user conflicts, etiquette concerns, erosion, soil compaction, parking demands, illegal trail building, dogs off-leash, other management concerns, and habitat loss and fragmentation (Hammitt et al., 2015). Hiking and camping on designated trails and campsites assigns visitor use impacts to these already impacted areas. However, when visitors venture off designated trails, hike, and camp in remote sections, or simply do not use recreation areas correctly, negative effects can be devastating and possibly irreversible (Cole, 2023; Dearden, et al., 2014; Pigram & Jenkins, 2005). Therefore, inspiring visitors’ engagement in pro-environmental behaviours (PEBs) while visiting natural areas is essential. As a response to the growing pressure and need to inspire visitors’ engagement in PEBs, the British Columbia Lodging and Camping Association led the development of a coalition focused on developing tools and interventions to support responsible visitation and nature-based recreation. In 2021, 12 British Columbia based organizations formed the collaborative campaign known as the Camper’s Code to encourage responsible and respectful camping practices. This collaboration includes provincial and national level governments, local community-based organizations, and industry associations and leaders. Literature Review As a result of recreation-related impacts and the increase in visitation, outdoor recreation managers and providers of parks, protected areas, and natural spaces are faced with the challenge of balancing welcoming visitors while minimizing impacts on the natural environment. Choices related to visitor management involve the decisions surrounding direct and indirect management strategies. Manning et al. (2017) describes direct management strategies as those that limit the degree of individual choice (e.g., enforcement of rules and regulations, permits, limiting access, etc.). Whereas indirect strategies emphasize or influence behaviours by managing factors that influence visitors' decisions (e.g., information, interpretation, education, persuasive techniques such as pledges, etc.). Indirect management is often preferred because it allows visitors the freedom to choose their actions and may be more efficient for managers as they require less costs compared to direct enforcement (Manning et al., 2017; Plummer, 2015). In the past decade, a new indirect management approach has arisen; the use of pledges and commitments. Pledges have been developed in a range of outdoor recreation and tourism contexts including national destination pledges such as New Zealand’s The Tiaki Promise, the Icelandic Pledge, and within Canada the Haida Gwaii Pledge. Destination pledges are visitor management tools that require an act of commitment, often in a public forum, from visitors to desirable and sustainable behaviours in the destination (Albrecht & Raymond, 2023). Parks, conservation agencies, zoos, and nature-based tourism agencies have also recently begun using pledges and commitments as a tool to influence behaviours and facilitate behavioural change (Ballantyne et al., 2018; Settina et al., 2020). However, to date, there lacks a substantial body of evidence supporting the efficacy of these pledges or a clear understanding of the mechanisms of success (i.e., why do they work?). The use of pledges provides an opportunity to combine persuasive communication with commitment actions. Both of these have demonstrated some effectiveness in influencing PEBs (Byerly et al., 2018; Mann et al., 2018; Hughes, 2013; Macdonald, 2015; He et al, 2022). The need for these innovative communication tools has been documented by scholars through gaps in current strategies and promising results of recent studies (He et al., 2022; Byerly et al., 2018; Kidd et al., 2019). A common critique of environmental communication has been the reliance on knowledge, awareness, and static messaging (Kidd et al., 2019; Albrecht & Raymond, 2023). These practices are unable to account for the variability in human behaviours and leave out the evidence that communication strategies should seek to influence attitudes, emotions, values, social norms, etc. (Blye et al., 2023; Brown et al., 2010). Examples include Leave No Trace principles, or simple codes of conduct which fail to include sufficient rationale for why visitors (and local recreators) should abide by the guidelines (Malloy & Fennell, 1998). Sirakaya (1997) suggests that the inclusion of the reasons for each guideline, and outlining possible harmful effects associated with non-compliance, would increase the efficacy of a code. Pledges are an opportunity to go beyond awareness and build commitment from visitors while simultaneously involving multi-media and social marketing to influence behaviours. This study is guided by both the Value-Belief-Norm Theory (VBN) and the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). VBN follows the belief that individuals actions are based on personal values (which are shaped by world views), the belief that things which are important to those values are under threat, and the notion that one’s actions can help alleviate the threat posed (Van Riper & Kyle, 2014). The notion of the natural environment being under threat is presented as impacts due to outdoor recreation (e.g., camping). Reducing visitor impact by following low-impact camping practices such as the Camper’s Code is one example of how to mitigate that threat. TPB states that all behaviours are preceded by intentions, individuals’ intentions are viewed as a function of three things: individuals’ perceived control over a situation, their attitude toward performing a particular act, and their subjective norms (Ajzen, 1991). Methodology A two-phased quasi-experimental design was employed to evaluate the impact of the Camper’s Code principles. This collaboration between the BCLCA and academic researchers ensured both practical relevance and methodological rigor. The BCLCA’s leadership facilitated real-world implementation of the interventions, while academic researchers conducted the field-based experiments with overnight visitors in parks and campgrounds across British Columbia. This method follows similar work by Settina et al. (2020) and Bueddefeld et al. (2023) who tested various communication interventions in field experiments and also combines the approach of Mann et al. (2018) who included a commitment action (pledge) in an attempt to influence conservation related behaviours. Phase one included overnight visitors to 5 provincial parks and 2 private campgrounds in British Columbia. Survey responses were collected during weekdays, weekend days and holidays. Park and campground visitors were approached at random at various locations throughout the sites, including trail heads, permit offices, visitor information centres, boat launch areas, and campsites. This temporally stratified convenience-based sample strategy resulted in 769 completed surveys (n=769). Researchers used Android tablets, with off-line software tool Qualtrics. The survey instrument included psychological determinants of behaviour in line with previous studies and relevant theories such as the Values Belief Norm theory, as well as behavioural measures related to the 9 principles in the Camper’s Code (Cooper et al., 2024; Miller, 2019; van Riper et al., 2020). Overnight visitors to campgrounds were approached and asked to participate in the research study and were randomly assigned one of the following: • Treatment 1: Written communication regarding the Camper's Code • Treatment 2: Multi-media communication (2-minute video) providing a rationale for the Camper's Code. • Control: No intervention, overnight visitors to campgrounds other than those included in treatments 1 and 2. Phase two included a follow-up survey three months after the initial survey. Participants who provided contact information were contacted via and asked to participant in a short follow survey. This temporal difference provides the opportunity to investigate knowledge/comprehension of the Camper’s Code principles and provide an additional self-reported measure of PEB/responsible recreation behaviours. The follow up survey contained some of the same measures and variables as the initial survey and allowed the research team to test for any changes over time. Date collection for this phase is currently on-going. Results To test whether respondents’ adoption of responsible recreation behaviours was influenced by the treatment conditions, independent sample t-test and one-way ANOVAs were conducted (Hofman & Hughes, 2018). The independent sample t-test compared the participants who took the campers code pledge and those who did not (control). Results suggest that the participants who took the Campers Code pledge had statistically higher behavioural intentions more in line with the Campers Code principles (M=6.54 compared to M=6.29; t=2.33, df=687, p=.010). To better understand the differences between the groups and the impact of the Campers’ Code pledge with and without the use of an information video one-way ANOVAs were conducted. Results of the one-way ANOVA compared the mean scores of resp

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.