The link between travel motives and

activities in nature-based tourism

Mehmet Mehmetoglu and ystein Normann

Mehmet Mehmetoglu is a
Professor based in the
Department of Psychology,
Norwegian University of
Technology and Science,
Trondheim, Norway.
ystein Normann is an
Associate Professor based
in the Department of
Tourism, Harstad University
College, Harstad, Norway.

Abstract
Purpose The essence of the demand for nature-based tourism is an important issue seen from both
an academic and practitioners perspective. One approach to understanding it is to examine the
relationship between tourists travel motivations and activities. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to
conduct an empirical study of the links between travel motivations and travel activities within the
nature-based tourism context.
Design/methodology/approach Performing a series of logistic regression analyses, the authors have
adopted this approach to empirically investigate the travel motivations and activities
(participated/planned to participate) of a sample of nature-based tourists in Northern Norway.
Findings The study clearly confirms the strong link between travel motivations and activities. More
specifically, the study findings are moderated by the fact that Novelty, Prestige, and Physical
activity are the main sources of motivation for participating in whale safaris, fishing and hiking
respectively. Furthermore, the findings show that non-Norwegian tourists are considerably more likely
than Norwegians to participate in these nature-based activities. Theoretical and practical implications of
the study are also provided.
Research limitations/implications The survey was conducted in a limited geographical area, and
the results should accordingly be tested in several places. Analysis of other motives and activities will
provide further information.
Practical implications Knowledge about factors motivating tourists to participate (or not) in certain
nature-based activities is of value to the industry, both in marketing and providing service to the
customers.
Originality/value The paper adds useful knowledge to the relationship between nature-based
tourists travel motivations and activities.
Keywords Norway, Tourism, Consumer behaviour, Travel activity, Travel motivation,
Nature-based tourism, Motivation (psychology)
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
Nature-based tourism is an overarching construct that reflects various elements of several
alternative forms of tourism including ecotourism, adventure tourism, sustainable tourism
and even cultural tourism (Weaver, 2001). This assumption is also found in Valentines (1992)
definition of nature-based tourism as the direct enjoyment of some relatively undisturbed
phenomenon of nature. The extent to which tourists enjoy nature will also depend on the
degree to which their travel experiences are dependent on nature. He argues accordingly
that there are three types of activities that fall under his definition: experiences that are
dependent on nature, activities that are enhanced by nature, and activities for which a
natural setting is incidental.
Using this definition as a premise, it can be asserted that nature-based tourism today
represents a significant economic activity which in recent decades has been growing even
more quickly than tourism in general (Wight, 1996; Nyaupane et al., 2004). Furthermore,

DOI 10.1108/TR-02-2013-0004

VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013, pp. 3-13, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1660-5373

TOURISM REVIEW

PAGE 3

several researchers (e.g. Silverberg et al., 1996) point out that nature-based tourism
contributes substantially to host economies. The economic benefit of nature-based tourism
has therefore also received growing attention from tourism scholars. As Hall and Boyd
(2005) claim, nature-based tourism has today become one of the most significant areas of
research in tourism studies.
Although the existing research has contributed to increasing our understanding of
nature-based tourism and tourists, it has mainly been descriptive in that many studies have
used factor analysis and/or cluster analysis to arrive at different classifications of travel
motivations, activities and/or various segments/typologies of nature-based tourists
(e.g. Mehmetoglu, 2005). However, an examination of the possible relationships between
these descriptive constructs may impart even more valuable information from both an
academic and a practical viewpoint. We therefore wished to conduct an empirical study of the
links between travel motivations and travel activities within the nature-based tourism context.

2. Literature review
2.1 Travel motivations of nature-based tourists
Etymologically motive stems from the Latin movere, to move (Dann, 1981). Motive has
been used to refer to internal factors that direct and integrate a persons behaviour for
potential satisfaction (Murray, 1964; Iso-Ahola, 1982). Motive for tourism is consequently
defined as the set of needs which predispose a person to participate in a touristic activity
(Pizam et al., 1979 cited in Yuan and McDonald, 1990, p. 42). Motivation occurs when an
individual wants to satisfy a need. A want is then one of awareness.
Tourist motivation refers to touristic travel in general, or to a specific choice in particular
(Parrinello, 1993), and seeks to explain why an individual or group has behaved or is about
to behave in a certain way, rather than how the event has happened or will take place (Dann,
1981). For the purposes of the present study, tourist motivation is examined in relation to the
concepts of push and pull (Dann, 1977). Push factors are the socio-psychological
constructs of tourists and their home environment that predispose them to travel, whereas
pull factors are those that attract them to a given destination once the decision to travel has
been made (Dann, 1977; Uysal and Hagan, 1993; Yuan and McDonald, 1990). As Dann
(1981, p. 190) puts it, [the push factor] deals with tourist motivation per se. Further,
Sharpley (1999, p. 135) re-emphasises that:
Generally, it is the push factors [. . .] of an individual, that lead to the decision to purchase a holiday
in the first place, the nature of those needs determining the type of holiday the individual wants.

The literature reveals attempts by several scholars at an empirical identification of the travel
motivations of nature-based tourists. Eagles (1992) distinguishes the following important pull
and push motivations for group ecotourists: wilderness and undisturbed nature, lakes and
streams, being physically active, mountains, national parks, experiencing new lifestyles,
rural areas, coastal scenery, and meeting people with similar interests. Silverberg et al.
(1996), in their study of a sample of North Americans who travel frequently, have an interest
in the environment, and may have an interest in nature photography, identify six different
motivational factors based on activity, interest, and opinion (AIO) scales: education/history,
camping/tenting, socialising, relaxation, viewing nature, and information.
Palacio and McCool (1997), in their examination of a sample of visitors to Belize, discovered
that their respondents perceive the following four factors as the benefits of nature-based or
ecotourism: escape, learning about nature, health enhancement, and cohesiveness.
Hvenegaard (2002) draws nine main motivations from a study of a sample of birders,
trekkers, and general visitors at a national park located in North-Western Thailand: highest
point of Thailand, birds and wildlife, scenery and waterfalls, culture and hill tribes, social
outing, natural environment, vacation, and physical activities. Holden and Sparrowhawk
(2002) suggest that the motivations of ecotourists visiting Annapurna in Nepal can be
captured using five comprehensive motivational factors including relaxation, thrills and
excitement, social interaction, self-esteem and development, and fulfilment.

PAGE 4 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013

Another study (Meng et al., 2006) of visitors to a nature-based resort located in Southwest
Virginia identifies four main motivational factors: activities for seeing and doing,
relaxation/familiarity, family/friend togetherness, and novelty/romance. Mehmetoglu
(2007), in a study of nature-based tourists in northern Norway, identifies six main travel
motivations including nature, physical activities, novelty/learning, mundane everyday life
and ego/status. Luo and Dengs (2008) study is another work describing different
motivations expressed by a sample of individuals visiting a national forest park in China.
These motivational factors are novelty/self-development, return to nature, knowledge and
fitness, and escape. Raadik et al. (2010), through a factor analysis, extract four main factors
representing the reasons/motives of a sample of tourists for visiting the Fulufjallet, a national
park in Sweden. These reasons were self-discovery, experiencing places, seeking solitude,
and challenging oneself.
2.2. Travel motivations and activities in nature-based tourism
The relationship between travel motivations and activities has generally been examined
empirically in tourism and recreation. This has been done either directly or indirectly. The
direct approach refers to studies (e.g. Reisinger and Mavondo, 2004) that have investigated
how specific sets of travel motivations (e.g. escape, socialisation, etc.) are related to sets of
travel activities (hiking, dining, etc.). The indirect approach includes research that has dealt
with the same issue with higher-order constructs (i.e. push/pull). In these studies
researchers have examined how push factors (motivations) may have influenced pull factors
(activities and other destination attributes) (e.g. Kim et al., 2003).
With regard to the link between travel motivations and activities (preference/participation) in
nature-based tourism, there have been sporadic attempts to look into this issue in detail
(i.e. at the item level). Segmentation has been the common approach used to examine this
relationship, where nature-based tourists have been grouped either in terms of travel
motivations or travel activities and the resulting segments/groups compared based upon
motivations or activities respectively.
Tangeland (2011) in his study of a sample of nature-based tourists first arrives at four main
travel motivations which he entitles new activity, social, skill development and quality
improvement. He then extracts five distinct clusters based on these four motivations.
Finally, he compares these five segments in terms of their consumption of a large number of
activities such as hiking, climbing, rafting, etc. Mehmetoglu (2007) does the opposite in that
he first through a principal component analysis extracts four main travel activities
(historic/cultural, challenging, relaxing, and pleasure-based activities) of a sample of
nature-based tourists. He then generates three distinct clusters based upon these activities,
and subsequently compares these clusters in terms of their travel motivations.
Although these studies have contributed to understanding the demand for nature-based
tourism, there is still a need to examine the link between travel motivation and activity on an
item level and more directly through a regression approach, as in the present study, rather
than using a general segmentation approach.

3. Method and data

3.1. Study site
The study site was the region of Lofoten, Vesteralen and Southern Troms (the LOVEST
region) in Northern Norway. The region is dominated by islands, one of which, Hinnya, is the
largest island in Norway. The road connections in the region are fairly good, and the islands
are connected to the mainland, either by bridges or by tunnels. Any of the tourist businesses
could be reached within three hours drive from Harstad, the main town in the area.
3.2. Sampling and sample
The sample was made during three months, from June to August 2011. 3025 questionnaires
available in eight languages were distributed to 26 tourist businesses, which represent the
main bulk of the companies offering nature-based activities in the LOVEST region. The hosts

VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 5

then distributed the questionnaires to their guests and collected them on completion. By 1
September, 867 questionnaires from 18 tourist businesses had been collected, representing
a response rate of 29 per cent and an average of 48 questionnaires per company. The
sample statistics are shown in Table I.
3.3. Questionnaire
Respondents were asked to complete a three-page questionnaire consisting of
standardised questions primarily about their socio-demographic profiles, visit
characteristics, evaluation of various product components related to the company and
destination, motivations for visiting the area, activities participated in or planned as well as
their overall satisfaction with their holiday in the region. These self-administered
questionnaires were expected to take about ten to 12 minutes to complete.
3.4. Measurement of study variables
The dependent variables of the study were dichotomous. More specifically, the respondents
were asked to reveal whether or not they had participated in/planned to participate in fishing,
whale safari, hiking and camping (0 no, 1 yes). The independent variables of the study
were measured using an ordinal scale (1 not important, 5 very important) asking the
respondents to indicate how important the following five motives were for their current trip: to
do physical activities (PHYSICAL), to mentally relax (RELAXATION), to escape from
everyday life (ESCAPE), to get to know new places/cultures (NOVELTY), and to get
experiences to talk about later (PRESTIGE). In addition, nationality (0 Norwegian,
1 Foreigner), gender (0 male, 1 female), age, educational level, and income were
used as control variables (see also Table I).
3.5. Analytical strategy
In line with the aim of the study, the four travel activities were regressed on the five travel
motives by also controlling for a set of socio-demographic variables. Since the dependent
variables were dichotomous, the logistic regression procedure was applied using STATA
software. In logistic regression analysis the predicted y-values are treated as probabilities,
PY 1 p and PY 0 1 2 p. The probability of a tourist having participated in each
of the activities can be expressed as:

p expb0 b1 x 1 . . . bk x k =1 expb0 b1 x 1 . . . bk x k :
Table I Sample statistics
Frequency

Nationality
Norwegian
Foreign

166
692

20
80

Gender
Male
Female

448
414

52
48

Educational level
Primary or secondary school
High school
Higher education

75
175
501

9
21
60

Household income (in NOK)

Up to 50,000
50,000-99,000
100,000-199,000
200,000-299,000
300,000-399,000
400,000 or more

52
25
59
116
116
151

10
5
12
22
22
29

Age

PAGE 6 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013

Mean

SD

49

0.47

The effect of one unit change in x1 would increase the probability that a tourist had
participated in an activity. This requires that the remaining x values are held constant.

4. Results
As depicted in Table II, four separate logistic regression analyses were run. The results
showed that the probability of fishing was influenced by the travel motives of NOVELTY and
PRESTIGE. While the former had a negative, the latter exerted a positive influence.
NOVELTY was also the only travel motive that had an impact (positive) on the likelihood of
participating in a whale safari. Regarding the probability of hiking, PHYSICAL and NOVELTY
had a positive, whereas PRESTIGE had a negative influence. Finally, the likelihood of
camping was positively influenced by NOVELTY.
It appeared that PRESTIGE was the driving force of fishing, PHYSICAL was the main catalyst
for hiking while NOVELTY was the primary motivational source for whale safari and camping
activities. To show these effects more explicitly, we have calculated and depicted the
probabilities of participating in the four activities for each unit of the five-point scale of the
travel motives. More specifically, as shown in Figure 1, someone rating the travel motive
PRESTIGE as very important (i.e. 5 on a 1-5 point scale) would, with close to 40 per cent
probability, have participated in fishing. On the other hand, for someone considering this
same motive as not important (1 on the scale), this probability would drop to nearly 15 per
cent.
Furthermore, the findings revealed that of the socio-demographic data, nationality was the
most influential variable in distinguishing between participants and non-participants in the
four activities. More specifically, foreigners were more likely to have taken part in whale
safaris, hiking and camping. Tourists with a higher education were more likely to have
participated in hiking and camping. Finally, age was negatively associated with the
probability of fishing. Neither gender nor income had any impact on the likelihood of
participating in any of the four activities.

5. Discussion and implications

The aim of this study is to improve our understanding of the nature-based tourism demand,
which is evidently vital knowledge for both the tourism industry and academics. Our
approach was to examine the relationship between five tourist travel motivations
(independent variables) and four tourist activities (dependent variables) through a series
of logistic regression analyses.
Table II Logistic regression analysis: effects on the probability of having participated in the four activities
Fishing

PHYSICAL
RELAXATION
ESCAPE
NOVELTY
PRESTIGE
Nationality
Gender
Age
Education
Income
_cons
n
Pseudo R 2

Whale safari
t-statistic

t-statistic

20.0583
20.0426
0.0743
20.303***
0.255**
0.431
20.402
20.0338***
20.254
20.0115
1.570
389
0.08

20.62
20.34
0.57
22.79
2.33
1.35
21.60
23.57
21.32
20.14
1.52

0.0481
0.168
20.110
0.309***
20.162
1.776***
20.117
20.0131
0.290
0.0478
22.965***
389
0.11

0.54
1.43
20.92
2.83
21.62
5.19
20.49
21.50
1.48
0.63
22.82

Hiking

Camping
t-statistic

t-statistic

0.454***
20.109
20.104
0.300***
20.277***
0.611**
0.265
20.0110
0.352*
20.0683
21.245
389
0.12

4.91
20.93
20.85
2.79
22.73
2.09
1.12
21.25
1.78
20.87
21.22

0.0369
0.0958
0.0249
0.192*
20.136
1.632***
20.352
20.0139
0.534***
20.0462
22.942***
389
0.11

0.41
0.81
0.21
1.78
21.37
4.68
21.47
21.59
2.64
20.61
22.77

Notes: * p , 0:1; ** p , 0:05, *** p , 0:01

VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 7

Figure 1 Probabilities of activity participation based on travel motives

5.1 Novelty
Novelty seekers are defined by March and Woodside (2005, p. 131) as seekers of new
culture and information, who also tend to undertake more activities and plan them less.
Experienced consumers will plan fewer consumption activities and are less likely to engage
in unplanned activities than inexperienced (first time) visitors (March and Woodside, 2005),
who constitute 68 per cent of the respondents in our survey. Dann (2005, p. 22) indicate that
novelty, as an important ingredient in a break from everyday life, is an important pull factor.
Novelty was the only motive with significant effect on all four activities in question, although
with a negative effect on fishing.
5.2 Prestige
Urry (2002, p. 12) argues that travel as such is a marker of status, although with the strong
democratisation of travel in recent years, one could also argue the opposite. Staying home
for the sake of the environment or for other ethical reasons may also gain respect. Riley
(1995) describes prestige-worthy tourism as a concomitant act between the prestige
conferrer (the one who admires and transfers prestige) to the conferee, who is the receiver.
He further concludes that the two underlying dimensions of prestige-worthy travel are
exclusivity and personal desirability. The travellers action is also more relevant than the
destination and activities.
Prestige was revealed to have a positive effect on fishing and a negative effect on hiking.
5.3 Physical activity
The four activities in the analysis all require some physical activity, in varying degrees.
Physical activity is not what is most sought after on holiday, neither among the respondents
in the LOVEST survey (Normann, 2012), nor in general (March and Woodside, 2005, p. 235).
Physical motivation was only found to be significant for the activity of hiking.
5.4 Relaxation and escape
Of the five motives tested in the regression analysis, relaxation and escape were the only
without significant effect on the four activities. Still, these are the most predominant motives

PAGE 8 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013

for tourists on holiday, both in the study area and elsewhere (Normann, 2012; Viken et al.,
2004, p. 38; Mehmetoglu, 2006, 2007; March and Woodside, 2005, p. 232). This does not
necessarily indicate non-participation in any activities. Various forms of fishing, hiking and
camping could be experienced as relaxing. The trends also indicate that passive relaxation
is out and active experience is in (Bieger and Laesser, 2004). Simcox (2004, p. 373)
categorises fishing, hiking, camping and whale watching as nature activities/outdoor
recreation, indicating that they can be performed both intensively and in a relaxed way.
These facts might also explain why relaxation and escape did not show any significant effect
on the probability of having participated in the four activities. The need for relaxation and
escape is probably met through soft activities.
5.5 Activities
The survey questionnaire contained 19 alternative activities among which the respondents
could choose one or more (Normann, 2012). Of these fishing, whale safari, hiking, and
camping revealed significant results when regressed against physical activity, prestige
(something to talk about later), and novelty (learn about new places/cultures). This was
not the case when the activities were regressed against relaxation and escape from
everyday routines (see Table II). The results found to be significant will be further discussed,
based on the four activities. These activities are often defined as adventure tourism,
depending on how they are conducted, in a relaxed or strenuous manner (Swarbrooke et al.,
2003; Buckley, 2010). According to Butler (2006, p. 249), one characteristic of activities
connected to cold water islands, to which the area in question belongs, is that tourists at
these destinations are active rather than passive.
5.6 Camping
In the literature the term camping is sometimes also associated with other forms of
accommodation like chalets, lodges and mobile homes (Buckley, 2010; Holloway and
Humphreys, 2012). The camping activity in this context refers solely to tent camping.
Novelty was the only motive with a significant effect on the probability of having camped.
This is also confirmed by the fact that . 50 per cent of the camping tourists rate novelty as
very important reason for taking the trip (Normann, 2012). The reason why camping is not
considered a physical activity by the participants in our survey is probably because putting
up a tent in the area of the survey is not regarded as a strenuous affair; the distance from the
road to an appropriate campsite is normally short.
Of the socio-demographic data (Table II) both nationality and education have an influence
on the probability of camping. The international tourists are more likely to camp than the
domestic. This may be due to the high cost of alternative accommodation in Norway and the
fact that Norwegian tourists often have other options like visiting family and friends.
Nationality and education both harmonise with novelty, the only significant motivation factor
connected to camping.
5.7 Fishing
There is a wide range of possibilities for marine fishing (Buckley, 2010, p. 161), and the
tourism fishing activity in Northern Norway can be divided into two groups; the dedicated
professionals (interested in trophy hunting and/or foraging) and the recreational
amateurs who are socially and opportunistically motivated (Normann, 2008, p. 243).
Our survey does not distinguish between these groups, but normally amateurs outnumber
professionals, as fishing is a popular family and social activity (Hallestvedt and Wulff, 2002,
p. 31). A total of 31.4 per cent (n 866) of the respondents in the current survey had
conducted or planned to conduct some form of fishing. Killion (2007) argues that sport
fishing is an important pull factor in tourism.
Novelty was found to have a significant negative effect on the probability of participating in
fishing activities, while prestige had a positive effect. Physical activity, relaxation and escape
had no significant effect. The negative effect of novelty connected to fishing may indicate
that fishing is a familiar activity to those who conduct it. Being competitive in its nature (man

VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 9

vs fish and competition between participants), it is not surprising that prestige has a
significant effect on the probability of having participated in fishing.
Based on its main travel motive (Figure 1), fishing appeared to have the lowest probability of
participation among the four activities. Of the socio-demographic data (Table II), age proved
to have a significant negative influence on the probability of fishing. It might be assumed that
the desire for prestige and recognition connected to performances like catching big fish
declines with increasing age.
5.8 Hiking
Hiking is by far the most popular activity in the survey area, and of the 866 respondents 50
per cent report having hiked or planning some kind of hiking. This is not surprising as hiking
is fast-growing and the most popular outdoor activity both in the USA and Europe (Cordell
and Super, 2000; Leitner and Leitner, 2004, p. 64; Gershuny, 2011). The combination of
camping and hiking has a long tradition, and in our survey 50 per cent of those who go hiking
also report that they have been or plan to go camping. Hiking is a combination of fun,
exercise and self-mastery, is adapted to the practitioners physical skills (Cordell and Super,
2000, p. 133) and is mostly low cost (Buckley, 2010, p. 38).
Three of the motivation factors have a significant influence on the activity, physical activity
and novelty being positive, while prestige was negative. Evidently there is little prestige
connected to the activity; having taken some long walks is probably not much to boast
about when returning home from holiday. The physical challenge will naturally vary
according to how strenuous the walk is and the fitness of the performer. However, the results
indicate that the respondents find the hiking activity rather challenging. Probably it has also
been enjoyed, judging by the number of participants.
The positive influence of novelty is probably caused by the proportion of first time visitors
among the hikers (75 per cent) and that 74 per cent of these were from abroad. Walking in
new areas is usually both an interesting and informative experience. Hiking is often an
unplanned activity, as little preparation is required.
As with camping, well-educated foreign tourists are the ones most likely to go hiking. Figure 1
also reveals that the probability of participating in the activity was 75 per cent among those
who rated hiking as a very important activity on the 1 to 5 point scale.
5.9 Whale watching
The two whale-watching enterprises in this study both bring the tourists to the same stock of
young male sperm whales that feed on squid at the edge of the continental shelf off
Vesteralen, Northern Norway (Normann, 2012). Higham and Lusseau (2004, p. 172) claim
that the popularity of whales is a result of the status that the charismatic megafauna have
achieved.
Whale watching is a relatively young activity in the tourism industry, dating back to 1950 in
California (Higham and Lusseau, 2004, p. 171). According to Parsons et al. (2003) the key
aspect of the whale-watching business is providing for the public to see cetaceans in their
natural habitat.
While hiking and camping are relatively inexpensive activities, whale watching has a price
tag which presumably should be reflected in fewer participants in the low-income groups.
However, this was not the case in our survey. The strong appeal of the whales seems to have
removed the barrier of price. Buckley (2010, p. 189) also found this to be the case among
surfers with limited means, who nonetheless would save up for a heliboard package every
two or three years.
Novelty was the only motivation factor of significant effect for participation in whale safaris,
and being a foreigner was the only socio-demographic variable of influence. The positive
experience expected from the whale safari has a strong pull effect, especially among
non-Norwegian tourists.

PAGE 10 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013

5.10 Implications
In interpreting the results of this study it should be taken into account that planned activities
based on motivation may be overruled by activities performed on impulse. As demonstrated
by March and Woodside (2005, pp. 131 and 230) through entry and exit surveys, tourists
motivation to visit attractions is affected by the possibility of discovering new
products/attractions during their stay at a destination. Motivation per se is accordingly not
a sufficient indicator. Although this survey does not separate out activities committed on
impulse, it nevertheless gives an indication of which factors may motivate tourists to
participate (or not participate) in certain nature-based activities.
For the industry this information is valuable, both in connection with marketing and providing
services to its customers. Hiking and camping as activities seem to be conducted by
relatively identical socio-demographic segments, and should accordingly be marketed with
this in mind. Relaxation and escape do not seem to be main motives for the tourists visiting
cold water islands and these motivational arguments could be toned down in favour of
promotion of attractive activities.
Novelty turned out to be the motivational factor with the strongest effect on the four activities
in the analysis. Future research should examine whether, and if so how, novelty is a driving
force for nature-based tourists visiting a destination, e.g. to what degree it affects choices
made on impulse.
Nature is the most important pull factor in the Norwegian tourism industry, a fact
underpinned by the statement by The Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management that
The nature and the cultural landscape is Norways main destination (Dirnat, 2012). The
tourism industry strives to develop and offer nature-based activities with attractive and
functional services that entice tourists to come and stay at the destination. At the same
time the basis of the products offered should not suffer. The intrinsic value of the
environment is indisputable, and reducing the quality of the product is not good for the
business.

References
Bieger, T. and Laesser, C. (2004), Future living conditions and mobility: travel behavior of alpine
tourists, in Weiermair, K. and Mathies, C. (Eds), The Tourism and Leisure Industry, The Haworth
Hospitality Press, New York, NY, pp. 253-270.
Buckley, R. (2010), Adventure Tourism Management, Butterworth-Heinemann, Amsterdam.
Butler, R. (2006), Epilogue: contrasting coldwater and warmwater island tourist destinations,
in Baldacchino, G. (Ed.), Extreme Tourism. Lessons from the Worlds Cold Water Islands, Elsevier,
Amsterdam, pp. 247-257.
Cordell, H.K. and Super, G.R. (2000), Trends in Americans outdoor recreation, in Gartner, W.C. and
Lime, D.W. (Eds), Trends in Outdoor Recreation, Leisure and Tourism, CABI Publishing, Wallingford,
pp. 133-144.
Dann, G.M.S. (1977), Anomie, ego-enhancement and tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 4
No. 4, pp. 184-194.
Dann, G.M.S. (1981), Tourism motivations: an appraisal, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 8 No. 2,
pp. 189-219.
Dann, G.M.S. (2005), Promotional issues, in Baldacchino, G. (Ed.), Extreme Tourism. Lessons from the
Worlds Cold Water Islands, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 15-29.
Dirnat (2012), Verdiskaping og naturbasert reiseliv (Added value and nature-based tourism),
The Norwegian Directorate for Nature Management, available at: www.dirnat.no/friluftsliv/reiseliv/
(accessed 1 February 2013).
Eagles, P.F.J. (1992), The travel motivations of Canadian ecotourists, Journal of Travel Research,
Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 3-7.

VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 11

Gershuny, J. (2011), Time-use surveys and the measurement of national well-being, Centre for
Time-use Research, Department of Sociology, University of Oxford, Oxford, available at: www.ons.gov.
uk/ons/rel/environmental/time-use-surveys-and-the-measurement-of-national-well-being/article-byjonathan-gershuny/index.html (accessed 1 February 2013).
Hall, C.M. and Boyd, S. (2005), Nature Based Tourism in Peripheral Areas, Channel View Publications,
Clevedon.
Hallestvedt, A. and Wulff, I. (2002), Turistfiske som inntektskilde, (Tourist fishing as a source of
income), Report for the Norwegian Tourism Board, Norwegian College of Fishery Science, University of
Troms, Troms, available at: ftp://ftp.imr.no/biblioteket/files/div/turistfiske_som_inntektskilde.pdf
(accessed 1 February 2013).
Higham, J. and Lusseau, D. (2004), Ecological impacts and management of tourist engagements with
cetaceans, in Buckley, R. (Ed.), Environmental Impacts of Ecotourism, CABI Publishing, Wallingford
and Cambridge, MA, pp. 171-186.
Holden, A. and Sparrowhawk, J. (2002), Understanding the motivations of ecotourists: the case of
trekkers, in Annapurna, Nepal, International Journal of Tourism Research, Vol. 4 No. 6, pp. 435-446.
Holloway, J.C. and Humphreys, C. (2012), The Business of Tourism, Pearson, Harlow.
Hvenegaard, G.T. (2002), Using tourist typologies for ecotourism research, Journal of Ecotourism,
Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 7-18.
Iso-Ahola, S.E. (1982), Toward a social psychological theory of tourism motivation: a rejoinder, Annals
of Tourism Research, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 256-262.
Killion, L. (2007), Sport fishing and big game fishing, in Jennings, G. (Ed.), Water-based Tourism,
Sport, Leisure, and Recreation Experiences, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, pp. 112-127.
Kim, S.S., Lee, C.K. and Klenosky, D.B. (2003), The influence of push and pull factors at Korean
national parks, Tourism Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 169-180.
Leitner, M.J. and Leitner, S.F. (Eds) (2004), Leisure Enhancement, The Haworth Press, New York, NY.
Luo, Y. and Deng, J. (2008), The new environmental paradigm and nature-based tourism motivation,
Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 392-402.
March, R. and Woodside, A.G. (2005), Tourism Behaviour. Travellers Decisions and Actions, CABI
Publishing, Wallingford.
Mehmetoglu, M. (2005), A case study of nature-based tourists: specialists versus generalists, Journal
of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 357-369.
Mehmetoglu, M. (2006), Segmenting the nature-based tourists based on travel mode choice, Journal
of Hospitality and Leisure Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 47-68.
Mehmetoglu, M. (2007), Typologising nature-based tourists by activity theoretical and practical
implications, Tourism Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 651-660.
Meng, F., Tepanon, Y. and Uysal, M. (2006), Measuring tourist satisfaction by attribute and motivation:
the case of a nature-based resort, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 41-56.
Murray, E.J. (1964), Motivation and Emotion, Prentice Hall, Englewoord Cliffs, NJ.
Normann, . (2008), Marine fishong tourism in Lofoten, Northern Norway, in Lovelock, B. (Ed.),
Tourism and the Consumption of Wildlife, Routledge, Oxford, pp. 239-253.
Normann, . (2012), Naturskende turister i LOVEST-regionen. Rapport fra sprreunderskelsen
2011 (Nature-seeking tourists in the LOVEST region. report from the 2011 survey), Skriftserie
Vol. 1-2012, Harstad University College, Harstad, available at: www.hih.no/nor/fou-_-oppdrag/fou-ogoppdrag/nyhetsarkiv/?&displayitem 847&module news (accessed 1 February 2013).
Nyaupane, G., Morais, D.B. and Graefe, A. (2004), Nature tourism constraints: a cross-activity
comparison, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 540-555.
Palacio, V. and McCool, S.F. (1997), Identifying ecotourists in Belize through benefit segmentation:
a preliminary analysis, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 234-243.
Parrinello, G.L. (1993), Motivation and anticipation in post-industrial tourism, Annals of Tourism
Research, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 233-249.

PAGE 12 TOURISM REVIEW VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013

Parsons, E.C.M., Warburton, C.A., Woods-Ballard, A., Hughes, A., Johnston, P., Bates, H. and Luck, M.
(2003), Whale-watching tourists in West Scotland, Journal of Ecotourism, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 93-113.
Raadik, J., Cottrell, S.P., Fredman, P., Ritter, P. and Newman, P. (2010), Understanding recreational
experience preferences: application at Fulufjallet National Park, Sweden, Scandinavian Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 231-247.
Reisinger, Y. and Mavondo, F. (2004), Modelling psychographic profiles: a study of the US and
Australian student travel market, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 44-65.
Riley, R.W. (1995), Prestige-worthy tourism behaviour, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 22 No. 3,
pp. 630-649.
Sharpley, R. (1999), Tourism, Tourists and Society, 2nd ed., ELM Publications, Huntingdon.
Silverberg, K.E., Backman, S.J. and Backman, K.F. (1996), A preliminary investigation into the
psychographics of nature-based travelers to the Southeastern US, Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 35
No. 2, pp. 19-28.
Simcox, D.E. (2004), Outdoor recreation and natural resource lands, in Leitner, M.J. and Leitner, S.F.
(Eds), Leisure Enhancement, The Haworth Press, New York, NY, pp. 371-397.
Swarbrooke, J., Beard, J., Leckie, S. and Pomfret, G. (2003), Adventure Tourism: The New Frontier,
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.
Tangeland, T. (2011), Why do people purchase nature-based tourism activity products? A Norwegian
case study of outdoor recreation, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, Vol. 11 No. 4,
pp. 435-456.
Urry, J. (2002), The Tourist Gaze, Sage, London.
Uysal, M. and Hagan, L.A.R. (1993), Motivation of pleasure travel and tourism, in Khan, M., Olsen, M.
and Var, T. (Eds), VNRs Encyclopedia of Hospitality and Tourism, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY,
pp. 798-810.
Valentine, P. (1992), Nature-based tourism, Special Interest Tourism, Belhaven Press, London,
pp. 105-127.
Viken, A., Akselsen, S., Evjemo, B. and Hansen, A. (2004), Lofotunderskelsen 2004 (The Tourist Survey
in Lofoten 2004), FoU Rapport R 27/2004, Telenor, Oslo.
Weaver, D. (Ed.) (2001), The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism, CABI Publishing, Wallingford.
Wight, P. (1996), North American Ecotourists: Market Profile and Trip Characteristics, Sage Publications,
Newbury, CA.
Yuan, S. and McDonald, C. (1990), Motivational determinants of international pleasure time, Journal of
Travel Research, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 42-44.

Further reading
Mill, R.C. and Morrison, A.M. (2002), The Tourism System, Kendall/Hunt, Dubuque, IA.

Corresponding author
ystein Normann can be contacted at: oystein.normann@hih.no

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

VOL. 68 NO. 2 2013 TOURISM REVIEW PAGE 13

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.