| 
|
CHAPTER TEN continued
The philosophy adopted on Dartmoor is that they have a distinct tourist "product" or basic resource. Their aims are not to commercially exploit the tourist, instead they seek to make their conserved resource available to the visitor in a manner sympathetic to the aims and ideals of public recreation and conservation. Such a marketing stance can best be described as neutral in the core area. This enables a proactive marketing stance to be adopted outside the National Park to advantage, that is in the peripheral area where economic needs take a greater priority. In pursuing this approach, in the core area tourists are no longer commercially exploited. Tourists are thus referred to as visitors and this immediately conjures up an ethos of hospitality rather than punters or turnstile trippers. This is something that it is recommended should be adopted for the Downland and the extended use of the noun "visitors" in this thesis reflects this consideration.
The visitor needs are then segmented into two general categories, 1) the core experience and 2) the necessary infrastructure to enable visitors to indulge in the core experience.
The core experience is Dartmoor itself, the basic resource. This is an identifiable tract of landscape with unique characteristics which result from a complex history of land utilisation, climate, culture, physical geography and geology. This is not a "product" that is adulterated to meet consumer or visitor needs. The Dartmoor experience is what it is and the visitor finds and enjoys it accordingly. This approach enables clear policies to be implemented with regard to the provision of visitor facilities. Such facilities are minimal and comprise merely the bare essentials. Somewhere to stop the car, perhaps toilets, free ranging access where possible, all totally informal, but little else. Tourism numbers are restricted by identifying distinct user groups which will be accommodated. Traffic impact is redistributed through traffic management plans. In this way conservation of the landscape sits happily alongside the considerations of visitor hospitality. There are no litter bins, fences are minimised and there is no blatant, offensive commercialisation of the National Park. This does not imply however that marketing techniques are not subtly used to achieve visitor management. A simple example is the siting of informal parking areas. No charge is made for parking. This not only enhances the visitor perceptions of the park but also means that the visitors park in the obvious allotted spots.
By contrast however, the commercial infrastructure of tourism is dealt with in an entirely different manner. Infrastructure comprises roads, hotels, amusement parks, cafes and restaurants and other facilities. In the core area, where some infrastructure such as roads is inevitable, these are deliberately managed to minimise the impact on the landscape by segregating traffic and directing away from sensitive areas. What the Park Authority seeks to do is to amass the commercial infrastructure provision outside the core area. This enables the surrounding rural economies to benefit by the redistribution of visitors away from the core area and enables the retention of the qualitative values of the core area. This does not suggest that there is a sacrificial zone approach however. The peripheral region still has to contain the infrastructure in a manner sympathetic with planning determinates but is less hindered by conservation priorities that the core area would wish to maintain. It also enables alternative tourist "products" such as themed attractions to be offered outside the core area. These would not be welcomed in the core area but add to the overall appeal of the greater region by offering a wider variety of tourist experiences.
This type of approach offers major advantages for the Sussex Downland similar to those enjoyed by Dartmoor National Park. In particular it enables decisions with regard to appropriate and inappropriate development on the Downland and the surrounding area to be made within a distinct policy framework. The clarification of thinking in this manner enables priorities to be set for all aspects of rural development, whether it be agriculture, rural industry, route planning, housing, open access policies, hotel and other accommodation, siting of tourist facilities etc.
Having established a structure for strategic planning the follow through at tactical level is immediately apparent.
The tourism industry is becoming more aware of the role that the countryside can play in the overall tourism experience and as such is a prime partner for the recreation provider. In developing the partnership however the Countryside Commission stress that the partnership can be enhanced to mutual benefit by mutually supportive tactical planning.[31] For example, a greater sense of care and understanding among visitors about the places they visit can be brought about with sympathetic marketing statements and education in addition to the tempering of the proactive marketing as discussed earlier. Commercial "visitor organisers" should recognise that they are part of a more extensive visitor phenomena in the countryside and each should accommodate the other. Mechanisms can also be set up to divert operator funds into product development in a manner sympathetic with the zoning considerations. In this way the "visitor organiser" avoids exploiting the product to extinction by adjusting his commercial stance to longer term ideals.
In conclusion, this chapter has explored the integration of tourism policy and management through a plethora of existing agencies and proposes that a forum is necessary to unify the effort and approach. The SATI has the potential for bringing together such agencies and for implementing a two-tier approach to planning and management of tourism. In the core area, environmental considerations are the priority and commercial tourism resources are then sited in the peripheral area. The Downland has distinct advantages by having two peripheral zones, each of differing character, enabling commercial tourism resources to be sited sympathetically.
The development of this approach is reinforced through the marketing strategy which is proactive in the commercial sector, thus ensuring that sound commercial principals are adhered to, but in the core area the marketing stance is "neutral" or "passive". This approach would be distinctly alien to the fast moving consumer goods marketeer. Marketing is used as a tool to control tourism within bounds determined as appropriate. In the following chapters the environmental, social and economic implications of this are considered in detail.
Footnotes:
[1] See Chapter 4.
[2] Brandon P. Short B. 1990, The South East from AD 1000, Longman, London, P17.
[3] Campbell W D. 1993, "The Garden of Eden No More", The Gardian, April 9.
[4] See Chapters 1 & 2 and the rationale for the study region delineation.
[5] See Chapter 4.
[6] Shoard M. 1980, The Theft of the Countryside, Temple Smith, London, p149.
[7] Merged from: Centre for Urban and Regional Studies, 1986, Land Ownership in National Parks, University of Birmingham; Countryside Commission, 1993, The National Park Authority, CCP230; Countryside Commission, 1992, Protected Landscapes in the United Kingdom, CCP362; Dartmoor National Park Authority, 1992, The work of the Authority, 1991/2. Some variation exists between sources.
[8] Gunn C. 1994, Tourism Planning, Taylor and Francis, London, p17.
[9] CPRE. 1990, What Future the South Downs?, promotional leaflet.
[10] BBC 2 Television, 1993, Southern Eye, April.
[11] Friends of National Parks, 1993, "Downs Suggest Another Way", Today, Spring edition No.35, p5.
[12] See primary and secondary land control earlier in Chapter 10.
[13] Sussex Downs Conservation Board, 1993, Objectives, circulated at SDCB meeting 19 April.
[14] WSCC, 1993, West Sussex Structure Plan, July 1993.
[15] ESCC, 1991, County Structure Plan.
[16] ESCC, 1991, A Quality Future, July.
[17] WSCC. 1993, A Rural Strategy for West Sussex, April.
[18] ESCC, 1994, "Into the 21st Century", East Sussex County Structure Plan Review: Policy Directions, Autumn.
[19] WSCC/ESCC. 1986, Sussex Downs AONB Statement of Intent, WSCC.
[20] Countryside Commission, 1986, The Sussex Downs, An Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, Aug.
[21] Brighton Borough Council, 1993, Economic Development Package, Economic Development Unit. Brighton, including: Brighton Business Facts, Seafront Arches, Seafront Development Prospectus, Corporate Economic Development Strategy, Strategy and Action Plan for Brighton's Town Centre, The West Pier and promotional folder.
[22] Countryside Commission, 1992, National Parks Marketing and Conservation Survey, CCP 354.
[23] Countryside Commission, 1992, CCP 354, p27.
[24] CPRE, 1990.
[25] Blunden J & Curry N. 1985, The Changing Countryside, Helm, London, p139.
[26] Blunden J & Curry N. 1985, p252/3.
[27] Homer P. 1993, "Major Move to Reverse Decline in Tourism", West Sussex Gazette, 23 Sept.
[28] Budden R. 1993, WSCC, Letter to the author, 12 Nov.
[29] West Sussex Gazette, 1993, "Too Much Small Talk", 23 Sept. p6.
[30] Homer P. 1994, "Major Push to Promote County to Tourists", West Sussex Gazette, 11 Aug. p2.
[31] Countryside Commission, 1992, Enjoying the Countryside, Policies for People, CCP 371, p6.
Click the book to return to the Title Page and Chapter List