Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
countries, notably in Belgium, the UK and Spain. In the case of Spain, the rail
trails, known as Vias Verdes, were developed partly to create an alternative to
beach and sun tourism (Otero, 2002). In Australasia, the development of rail
trails began in the early 1990s (Bradshaw, 2002), and there are several rural
rail trail projects in Australia and New Zealand. There is a continued interest
in conversion throughout the USA and Australasia, where freight lines are still
being closed.
While most trails are designed to cater for multi-users, they often encour-
age more cyclists than other types of users; this is principally because of the
hard surfaces and easy gradients. Beeton (2003) surveyed three rail trails in
the Australian state of Victoria, achieving 454 useable responses and a high
response rate of over 45 per cent. Of these, 89 per cent were cyclists. The pro-
file of users was similar to surveys undertaken elsewhere in North America
and Europe. The cyclists were mainly male (55 per cent), between 35 and 64
years old, with a large proportion having a higher educational background (46
per cent) and with 50 per cent riding as a couple or in small groups.
In relation to tourism development, most trails have been designed for a
wide range of users. Firstly, they are designed principally to encourage local
resident use; for example, the Otago Central Rail Trail in New Zealand. In a
study of this trail by Blackwell (2002), it was ascertained that the main com-
munity benefits were as follows:
• improved wellbeing
• learning about culture and history
• providing an opportunity to be with family and friends
• enhancing social interaction
• giving a sense of pride to local communities.
However, there are limitations regarding the veracity of such general conclu-
sions. This type of study often fails to take into account the structural and
intrapersonal constraints of non-users (Curry et al, 2001; Ravenscroft, 2004).
They rarely analyse why people do not use a trail. There are, of course, some
negative impacts of such trails. These relate principally to access to trails, espe-
cially when they encourage substantial visitation by car, as identified by
Lumsdon (2000a) in relation to the rail trails of the Peak District National
Park in the UK. Furthermore, some writers have asked whether trails are a
worthwhile investment of public funds (Crompton, 2001). In response, most
hedonic pricing studies of rateable values of properties in the proximity of
trails show that businesses benefit and that real estate prices rise:
The analysis suggests that each foot increase in distance to the
trail decreases the sale price of a sample property by $7.05, i.e.,
being closer to the Little Miami Scenic Trail adds value to sin-
gle family residential properties. (Kardeniz, 2008, piii)
A wide range of trail-user studies also indicate that direct-user expenditure
in local economies offers a major positive impact to places that are not
