1. E4G The E4G Toolkit

2. Some opening issues for the day Background -economic connections arising directly/indirectly from E4G type activity; How far can we explicitly measure economic outcomes connected to projects? exploring practical evaluation issues What types of information do we need?

3. Progress of the regional economy understood in terms of improvements in regional GVA/changes in productivity convergence and structural funds expect projects working with the built & natural environment to influence elements of the tourism facing economy & to have economic impacts in terms of GVA and employment improvements

4. E4G might…… improve skills supply side for tourism safeguard existing tourism revenues, stopping leakages improve diversity of local offer and perhaps extend the season; change distribution of visitor types: perhaps more staying visitors; or changing the nature of average spending patterns in rural areas; change the connections between leisure activities / interests and other activities

5. Don’t forget residents! A focus on the ‘visitor economy’ in performance indicators But projects improving natural environment benefit local communities. Improved flow of services from the habitat may mean that local residents do not go outside of the community to spend money …..and flow of social and environmental services deriving from project outcomes can spill over into the economic arena (areas more attractive to live in, locate in).

6. Scale of benefits linked to E4G….. scale of regional economic benefits linked to project spending and levered tourism is related to the following; gross spending of project monies and related employment incomes in reference areas; new and safeguarded tourism revenues associated with the improved or maintained natural and man made capital; new employment and incomes connected long term to improved natural assets….

7. Economy wide effects Direct + Indirect effects What influences regional economy-wide effects?

8. Regional effects direction of spending i.e. how far is project-related spending tied to employment, and what are monies spent on what is levered tourism spending spent on where spending is on goods and services, then what proportion of these bought in local economy? also relevant is location of 1 st round spending e.g. even small expenditures need to be placed in their respective local economy contexts i.e. small spending in a remote rural community may have a stronger economic profile than the same amount in a core location

9. Thorny issues to think about Additionality (MEANS) Whole project impact or just the European funded element? What would have occurred without EU support?; Could money have been used more efficiently Can outputs be credited to the project (tourism, weather, currency…)

10. Other tricky issues Double counting Displacement Gross – DWT – DISP – Adj for DC + Multiplier effects = Net

11. How big is gap gross & net??

12. Summary Economic interconnections can be mapped Some difficult and thorny issues to be confronted

13. The E4G Toolkit What is an E4G project expected to do/collect in terms of visitor numbers and related information? When you need to deliver outputs? How one might collect visitor information? Support resources available in the toolkit?

14. Expectations? EU monitors impact of interventions. M&E of levered visitation needs consideration -returns from visitor vol analysis/surveys a key part of evidence base for E4G Associated toolkit gives practical helps/tools Need for consistency across E4G – A common approach to evaluation means that the overall results of individual E4G bids can be reported consistently/compared.

15. What resources are available to help? Guidance on how to measure visitor volumes & numbers/estimates, A core visitor questionnaire set applicable to E4G Guidance on when/how to undertake visitor surveys & help on technical issues, such as sampling, Indicative resource implications of M&E activity, A database template in Microsoft Access™ format within which to input and store visitor survey data Examples of management, monitoring and communication plans upon which you can base those for your own project.

16. What needs to be done? (1) First, each site/project needs to complete and return an “E-Flyer” – a simple form available from the website (www.e4g.org.uk)www.e4g.org.uk This will enable WERU to find out basic information about your project/site (e.g. Contacts, start/finish dates, details of project), and will inform the choice of sites that will be asked to undertake survey questionnaires.

17. E-Flyer Returns to date: A total of 72 E-Flyers have been received by WERU from the 7 E4G Strategic Projects Strategic projects are at various stages of development in identifying and approving individual projects. E4G STRATEGIC PROJECTE-FLYERS Coastal Tourism1 Communities & Nature29 Heads of the Valleys Tourism1 Heritage Tourism20 Sustainable Tourism1 Valleys Regional Park20 Wales Coast Path-

18. What needs to be done? (2) Key component is visitor information is collecting visitor volume and survey data. Most E4G sites will only be required to supply information on visitor volumes Some (typically larger) projects will be required to undertake a limited number of more insightful visitor surveys

19. When In terms of visitation numbers projects expected to undertake an analysis of baseline within a short period of approval. Estimates of visitor volumes will be collected in each year from 2010 to end of project. Visitor surveys will be undertaken at a selection of projects during 2011 and 2013 (with the exception of sites funded under the VRP and Heads of the Valleys initiatives which survey in 2010-11). Projects which will be required to survey will be selected in 2010 by the E4G steering board and will be contacted with a view to developing appropriate surveys.

20. Visitor volumes… Key component of the M&E process is need to estimate visitor volumes/characteristics at sites. Volume estimates will be combined with data from visitor surveys and E4G-level modelling of indirect impacts to provide a gauge of projects’ overall economic impact. All sites – detailed surveys? NO e.g. smaller sites gain estimate of volumes and assume characteristics and behaviour are in line with those reported at other similar projects. To assist this a typology of sites has been produced to aid matching. To estimate volumes expectation is a mix of methods will be used

21. Options ? Cordon Pedestrian Count ‘Hotspot’ Pedestrian Count Car Park Vehicle Count Entry Ticket Sales Car Park Ticket Sales Links & routes: remote sensing

22. Generic planning and issues Each approach relatively straightforward but each needs degree of planning Site characteristics in terms of scale, scope will determine method Development of a sampling frame that ensures adequate coverage over the course of a day and week and controls for spikes Training of surveyors; data input/database and collection Provision of adequate tools counters/clickers and recording sheets to surveyors, data collection tools etc. Where analysis based on ticketed revenues need to examine concessions and season ticket visitation An up-front strategy to obtain & deal with data from car park operators when these are different from site managers

23. Website resources F2-F4

24. Visitor/Vehicle Counting Methodologies: When To Count? representative estimate of visitor numbers means visitor counts must be allocated and undertaken to reflect likely changes in attendance over year estimates on a quarter-by-quarter basis to fit with the collection of wider E4G and visitor/tourism data sites and projects need to estimate numbers January- March; April-June; July-September and October- December, with counts distributed within those quarters effort and resource does not need to be equally distributed

25. Suggested framework

26. Surveys Within the guidance pack and on the website there is also material for undertaking more detailed surveys. Purpose of visit, demographics, trip specifics, travel method, spending module There is no single, ideal method; site and visit characteristics might dictate a certain approach, as might the level of available surveyor resource.

27. Possible survey methods  Produces potentially the most ‘unbiased’ site survey  Requires planning to ensure surveyors don’t approach the same people multiple times (especially problematic with smaller visitor numbers)  Can be inefficient use of surveyor time where visitor numbers are lower  May be inappropriate for sites with restricted space or a set visitor flow. F2F Random Survey  Very resource efficient  Easy to manage – forms can possibly be distributed/collected over a period of days  Little control over sample (self selecting) leading to potential bias  Potential comprehension issues require carefully designed form Cannot control when surveys are completed Hotspot Self Completion Survey  Very resource efficient – questionnaires can be distributed to many visitors  Potentially good quality information, completed at leisure and post-visit  No control over returns leading to potential bias  Potentially uncertain/low response rates Potential quality/comprehension issues require carefully designed form Postal Return Self Completion Survey

28. Website resources F5-F6

29. Conclusions Planning surveys Be aware of S&Ws of different options for surveying and counting Website resources