Importance Performance Competitor Analysis for Comprehensive Assessment of National Forest Visitor Satisfaction

Public lands are an important source of outdoor recreation opportunities. These opportunities provide a variety of public benefits, including promoting physical and mental well-being, contributing to local economies, and raising conservation awareness. In response to current and potential demand, it is ever more important to meet and anticipate infrastructure and user needs. With aging infrastructure (e.g., trails, access points, parking lots), managers face the need to maintain existing, and establish new, recreation opportunities to meet user expectations and contribute to positive perceptions of recreation offerings within the realities of budgetary challenges. Compounding this difficulty is the frequent presence of hierarchical decision-making process within public agencies providing recreation opportunities. For example, within the U.S. Forest Service National Forest System (NFS), recreation investment decisions, such as those under the Great American Outdoors Act, are often made at the regional administrative level after considering the needs and conditions across multiple NFS units within the region. While certain aspects of infrastructure can be measured for quality (i.e., physical attributes like trail conditions), it is difficult to quantify psychological elements of user satisfaction. Recreationist satisfaction is important to promoting supportive and engaged users of public lands. Therefore, a priority for management is understanding how user experiences compare to expectations. Direct ratings from surveys can be useful proxies of user perceptions. For decades, Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) has translated importance and satisfaction ratings to action plans, a valuable management tool in valid application. However, IPA treats each unit as an “island,” and doesn’t fully address the challenge of comparing conditions and needs across units. A variation of IPA, known as Importance Performance Competitor Analysis (IPCA), compares a focal unit against a competitor. Using the National Visitor Use Monitoring Program (NVUM) satisfaction survey module, we adapted IPCA to the NFS regional organizations. Rather than analyzing unit versus competitor, we assessed each unit against its complementary regional aggregate over several points in time. A classification-based percentage identified the highest priorities regionally, selecting attributes for follow-up with IPA to identify relevant units for management. For two NFS regions, we present examples of translating survey output to reports meaningful for management, either as a snapshot in time or across multiple time points. These methodologies are adaptable to other unit networks under the same managerial oversight, with Likert scale data collected on multiple time periods. The primary objective is to translate survey data to recommended actions over a hierarchical network, which can guide managers in prioritizing needs and sustainable planning. In our examples, we identified region-level priorities (i.e., attributes) by site type, followed by use of a longstanding methodology (IPA) for site-level identification potentially useful to managers.