This page is outside of Ballotpedia's current coverage scope and does not receive scheduled updates. If you would like to help our coverage grow, please consider donating to Ballotpedia.

State environmental policy
U.S. environmental policy
Endangered species policy
State endangered species
Federal land policy
Environmental terms

TheU.S. National Park Service (NPS) manages more than 84 million acres of recreation lands. Each year, the service publishes its report onvisitor spending. The report analyzes the effect of visitors' economic activity in communities near a park or recreation area, specifically the effect on business sales, jobs, and income.^[1]

In 2014, the National Park System reported more than 292 million total visits. Visitors to national parks spent a total of $15.7 billion in local economies near park areas. According to the NPS, visitor spending directly supported more than 173,000 jobs, $5 billion in labor income, and $7.6 billion in value added togross domestic product (GDP) in 2014.

Overview

To track the economic impact of its parks and lands across the United States, the NPS uses economic models to estimate how much visitors spend in the communities around NPS-managed areas. When visitors attend a recreation area, they spend money to purchase goods and services in the communities near the national park. According to the NPS, this spending contributes to business sales, income, and employment and is called the direct effect of visitor spending. Indirect economic effects occur when businesses in a local economy purchase goods or services from other industries or when employees of directly affected businesses purchase goods and services in the local economy. These are known as the indirect or induced effect of visitor spending.^[1]

The economic effects of visitor spending to local economies are categorized into four types:^[1]

• Output: Output is the sum of all intermediate sales from a business to another business and the sales from a business to consumers.
• Employment: Employment is the change in the number of jobs generated in a particular region resulting from a change in output, such as sales earned by a business. Employment includes annualized full and part-time jobs.
• Labor income: Labor income includes employee wages and salaries, including the income of sole proprietors and payroll benefits.
• Value added: Value added is the contribution togross domestic product (GDP). Value added is equal to the difference between the amount for which an industry sells a product and the cost of producing that product.

Fiscal year 2014

Total economic effects of visitor spending (2014)

The table below summarizes the economic effects of visitor spending in the National Park System in 2014. Direct effects include the sales, income, and employment resulting from direct purchases from local businesses. Secondary effects include suppliers that purchase goods and services to provide supplies to local businesses as well as employees of businesses and suppliers that use their income to purchase goods and services in a local economy. The sum of the direct and secondary effects is the total effect of visitor spending.

The National Park Service found that visitors to the National Park System spent a total of $15.7 billion in local economies near park areas. The spending directly supported 174,000 jobs, $5 billion in labor income, $7.6 billion in value added to GDP, and $12.4 billion in output in the national economy.^[1]

Park visits and visitor spending by state (2014)

The table below summarizes the total visits in each state to National Park Service areas and the amount of total visitor spending (in millions) in 2014.

The states with the most visits wereCalifornia (37.3 million visits),Virginia (22.8 million visits), andNorth Carolina (16.7 million visits). The states with the most visitor spending wereCalifornia ($1.65 billion),Alaska ($1.14 billion), andNorth Carolina ($1.1 billion).

Fiscal year 2013

Total economic effects of visitor spending (2013)

The table below summarizes the economic effects of visitor spending in the National Park System in 2013. Direct effects include the sales, income, and employment resulting from direct purchases from local businesses. Secondary effects include suppliers that purchase goods and services to provide supplies to local businesses as well as employees of businesses and suppliers that use their income to purchase goods and services in a local economy. The sum of the direct and secondary effects is the total effect of visitor spending.

The National Park Service found that visitors to the National Park System spent a total of $14.6 billion in local economies near park areas. The spending directly supported 143,000 jobs, $4.2 billion in labor income, $6.9 billion in value added to GDP, and $11.2 billion in output in the national economy.^[2]

Park visits and visitor spending by state (2013)

The table below summarizes the total visits in each state to National Park Service areas and the amount of total visitor spending (in millions) in 2013.

The states with the most visits wereCalifornia (35.5 million visits),Virginia (22 million visits), andNorth Carolina (16.1 million visits). The states with the most visitor spending wereCalifornia ($1.53 billion),Alaska ($1.14 billion), andNorth Carolina ($1 billion).

Fiscal year 2012

Total economic effects of visitor spending (2012)

The table below summarizes the economic effects of visitor spending in the National Park System in 2012. Direct effects include the sales, income, and employment resulting from direct purchases from local businesses. Secondary effects include suppliers that purchase goods and services to provide supplies to local businesses as well as employees of businesses and suppliers that use their income to purchase goods and services in a local economy. The sum of the direct and secondary effects is the total effect of visitor spending.

The National Park Service found that visitors to the National Park System spent a total of $14.7 billion in local economies near park areas. The spending directly supported 147,000 jobs, $4.2 billion in labor income, $6.9 billion in value added to GDP, and $11.3 billion in output in the national economy.^[3]

Park visits and visitor spending by state (2012)

The table below summarizes the total visits in each state to National Park Service areas and the amount of total visitor spending (in millions) in 2012.

The states with the most visits wereCalifornia (36 million visits),Virginia (23.3 million visits), andNorth Carolina (17.7 million visits). The states with the most visitor spending wereCalifornia ($1.53 billion),North Carolina ($1.1 billion), andAlaska ($1.06 billion).

See also

• 

  Environmental policy in the U.S.

• 

  Energy policy in the U.S.

• 

  Endangered species policy in the U.S.

• U.S. National Park Service
• Federal land policy

Footnotes

v • e Environmental Policy Background Environmental policy in the United States •Clean Air Act •Clean Water Act •Conservation •Endangered Species Act •U.S. Environmental Protection Agency •Enforcement at the EPA •Glossary of environmental terms •Energy and environmental news Energy and environmental news January 2015 •February 2015 •March 2015 •April 2015 •May 2015 •June 2015 •July 2015 •August 2015 •September 2015 •October 2015 •November 2015 •December 2015 Environmental terms Air pollutants •Air Quality Index •BLM grazing permit •Carbon dioxide •Carbon footprint •Clean Air Act •Clean Water Act •Climate change • ConservAmerica •Cross State Air Pollution Rule •Deep ecology •Ecology •Endangered species •Implementation of the Endangered Species Act •Environmental chemistry •Environmental engineering •Environmental health •Environmental restoration •Environmental science •Federal land •Fracking •Greenhouse effect •Greenhouse gas •Ground-level ozone standards •Ground water •Hazardous air pollutant •Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change •Keystone XL •Mercury and air toxics standards •Municipal solid waste •National Ambient Air Quality Standards •National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System •National Priorities List of Superfund sites • National Wildlife Federation •Natural resources •Nonpoint source of water pollution •Oil •Ozone •Pesticide •Petroleum •Point source of water pollution •Public water system •Radioactive waste •Renewable energy resources •Renewable Portfolio Standards •Solar energy •State park •Superfund •Traditional energy resources •U.S. Bureau of Land Management •U.S. Environmental Protection Agency • •U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service •U.S. Forest Service •U.S. Geological Survey •Wastewater treatment •Water quality criteria •Wetland •Wilderness Act •Wilderness Society •Wind energy Endangered species terms Candidate species •Critical habitat •Delisting •Distinct population segment •Endangered species •Listed species •Listing a species •Listing petition •Species recovery •Taking a species Environmental policy by state Alabama •Alaska •Arizona •Arkansas •California •Colorado •Connecticut •Delaware •Florida •Georgia •Hawaii •Idaho •Illinois •Indiana •Iowa •Kansas •Kentucky •Louisiana •Maine •Maryland •Massachusetts •Michigan •Minnesota •Mississippi •Missouri •Montana •Nebraska •Nevada •New Hampshire •New Jersey •New Mexico •New York •North Carolina •North Dakota •Ohio •Oklahoma •Oregon •Pennsylvania •Rhode Island •South Carolina •South Dakota •Tennessee •Texas •Utah •Vermont •Virginia •Washington •West Virginia •Wisconsin •Wyoming Endangered species policy Costs of listing a species •Delisting a species •Endangered Species Act litigation •Endangered species policy in the United States •Endangered Species Act litigation •History of the Endangered Species Act •Private property and the Endangered Species Act •Science and the Endangered Species Act •Success rate of the Endangered Species Act •Transparency and the Endangered Species Act Endangered species policy by state Alabama •Alaska •Arizona •Arkansas •California •Colorado •Connecticut •Delaware •Florida •Georgia •Hawaii •Idaho •Illinois •Indiana •Iowa •Kansas •Kentucky •Louisiana •Maine •Maryland •Massachusetts •Michigan •Minnesota •Mississippi •Missouri •Montana •Nebraska •Nevada •New Hampshire •New Jersey •New Mexico •New York •North Carolina •North Dakota •Ohio •Oklahoma •Oregon •Pennsylvania •Rhode Island •South Carolina •South Dakota •Tennessee •Texas •Utah •Vermont •Virginia •Washington •West Virginia •Wisconsin •Wyoming Environmental statistics Payments in lieu of taxes •Land ownership by state •Grazing permits on BLM lands •Federal land ownership by state •BLM oil and gas permits by state •Environmental spending in the 50 states •Greenhouse gas emissions by state •Superfund sites in the United States •National Park Visitor Spending Effects Report Endangered species statistics Endangered species by state •Endangered animals by state •Endangered plants by state •Delisted species •Top 20 federally funded species •Land acquisition funding for endangered species •Federal endangered species grants by state