Resident Sentiment Index Are Copenhagen Residents Tourism-Supportive? 2018
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
1 Resident Sentiment Index Are Copenhagen residents tourism-supportive? 2018 R E S I D E N T S Sentiment Index [email protected] 2 Content 03 RSI Survey Introduction 08 Key Sentiment Index Principles and methodology Overall support & risk assessment Sample description 11 Tourism Impact Perception 18 Resident Mood Mood Index / Benchmarking Impact perceptions Ah hoc questions Benchmarking Problems caused by tourism Mapping of Detractors / Ambassadors 25 Take-Aways 21 Key findings Key trends per district Focus on specific segments 3 Introducing the Resident Sentiment Index A Global Standard 4 For measuring residents’ sentiment towards tourism Ensure your residents will play for and not against your tourism planning TOP Influencers of visitor experience Hospitality of local inhabitants Local food A global standard for all cities Shopping For monitoring residents’ perceptions towards tourism Safety feeling Accommodation Because residents’ attitude Cleanliness / Environment is the first driver 30+ Essential Indexes Attractions of your visitor experience Tourism positive and negative impact on resident mood Taxi service Visitor information centers Cultural shows Historic monuments and sites Customization Convenience of visit, crowd Because each city addresses specific tourism situations Nightlife Public transport Signposting Unique Benchmarking 300 350 400 450 500 550 Source: TCI / TRAVELSAT Competitive Index Based on norms for cities with similar features Correlation to the overall satisfaction Tourism growth only goes hand in hand with local population acceptance. A flexible methodology Full service or embedded in exiting resident surveys We provide the data to monitor residents’ sentiment … before it becomes a problem! How is Resident Sentiment Data collected? 5 A flexible screening process maximizes sample representativeness Sample representativeness o Quotas and data weighting schemes defined per district, gender and age using reference population statistics o Inclusion of areas having all levels of tourism pressure on residents o Controls on qualification criteria that can influence opinions: tourism-related occupation, visitor hosting activities… Recruitment of respondents o From geo-localized access panels o Ensures a good dispersion of respondents across districts Standard online questionnaire + ad hoc questions o Online self-completed responsive questionnaire (~ 6-8 minutes to complete) o Includes questions about residents’ perceptions of the tourism impact and questions to profile residents for segmentation purposes o Ensures consistency and data comparability across cities for benchmarking Data has been weighted to reflect city statistics for citizens’ age, gender and geographical location (districts) Benchmarking Scope 6 Providing comparative analysis for all standard indexes Benchmarking that reveals your specific issues to address o Comparison of key resident sentiment scores compared to the RSI benchmarking norms o RSI Benchmarking norms are calculated from 3300+ resident interviews (online questionnaires) across 13 cities in Europe: Berlin, Stockholm Brussels, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Florence, Lisbon, London, Lyon, Prague, Rome, Barcelona, Paris. Benchmarking metrics for mapping where you stand o Average scores reflecting European resident opinion “norms” o Highest score (Max value from the set) o Lowest score (Mix value from the set) Note: Individual scores of cities are not provided. Sample specifications 7 Results are weighted according to the population age and district distribution in Copenhagen (see map) Population distribution 65+ 18-24 15% 14% 8% 11% 6% 50-64 11% 18% AGE 25-34 8% 28% 6% 1076 respondents 14% o Interviewed online 35-49 o Screened from access panel 25% 9% 8% o Time frame: mid-December 2017 8% 10% 52% 48% 8 Tourism Impact Perception TOURISM IMPACT PERCEPTIONS R E S I D E N T S 9 Sentiment Index Positive Neutral Negative Do not know A focus on the environmental impact of Local economy 73% 20% 3%4% tourism is required Heritage preservation 70% 23% 4%4% Copenhagen residents recognize a positive tourism impact on economy, city atmosphere and activities, City atmosphere / entertainment 66% 23% 7% 4% while the impact of tourism on their quality of life remains acceptable. Leisure and cultural offer 62% 30% 5%4% However, a concern is expressed about the environmental impact that tourism generates, in Overall city aspect 56% 32% 6% 6% terms of both natural protection and cleanliness. Infrastructure 44% 39% 12% 5% Definitions Overall city aspect The general aspect of the town 25% 52% 16% 7% Resident quality of life Heritage preservation The preservation and showcasing of the historical heritage Local economy The local economy Resident quality of life The quality of life for residents 5% Cleanliness of public spaces 22% 40% 32% Environmental protection Protection of the environment and natural sites Cleanliness of public spaces The cleanliness of public spaces Leisure and cultural offer The cultural activities and leisures on offer Environmental protection 18% 47% 29% 7% City atmosphere / entertainment The atmosphere and entertainment in the town Infrastructure The infrastructure (transport, sporting equipment, cultural features...) n = 1076 R E S I D E N T S Tourism Impact Perception - Benchmarking Sentiment Index 10 How does Copenhagen perform compared to the average? Copenhagen Average cities Min value Max value The general sentiment 100% impact is in line with or 82% 83% 83% 80% 70% 72% above norms 71% 67% 65% 60% 54% 69% 59% 57% 59% 49% Most aspects impacted by tourism are rated in line 53% 55% 40% 37% 34% or above the average city norms. 41% 43% 32% 25% The environmental protection issue is a special 33% 19% 20% 27% concern compared to the average of other cities. 18% 13% 9% Tourism’s impact on culture and leisure offerings 0% 3% as well as on infrastructure is also a point of -10% -11% -7% concern since Copenhagen is rated below the -20% -12% city norm within these categories. -26% -40% -31% -39% Definitions NET SCORES (% of respondents who agrees minus % of respondents who disagrees) -60% Overall city aspect The general aspect of the town Heritage preservation The preservation and showcasing of the historical heritage Local economy The local economy Resident quality of life The quality of life for residents Environmental protection Protection of the environment and natural sites Cleanliness of public spaces The cleanliness of public spaces Leisure and cultural offerings The cultural activities and leisure offerings City atmosphere / entertainment The atmosphere and entertainment in the town n = 1076 Infrastructure The infrastructure (transport, sporting equipment, cultural features...) RSI benchmarking cities: Berlin, Stockholm Brussels, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, Florence, Lisbon, London, Lyon, Prague, Rome, Barcelona, Paris. Competitive scope: Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Barcelona, London, Berlin, Rome, Prague, Lisbon, Stockholm, Brussels, Dublin R E S I D E N T S Sentiment Index Qualifying the problems caused by tourism 11 Seasonality and types of nuisances Seasonality perceptions Nuisances What type(s) of problems does tourism cause in your city? Norm = 16% Norm 56% 63% Traffic issues 50% 6% 51% Noise 51% 46% Problems of cleanliness / waste 26% Norm = 42% 67% 41% Crowding 47% 31% Parking issues 40% Security issues, disrespect 67% 26% Norm = 42% 43% 23% Housing prices increase 37% 17% Living costs increase n = 1076 30% 13% Depopulation of city centres Problems throughout the whole / most of the year Answers among residents stating that they experience problems due to tourism throughout the Problems at certain times of the year whole/most of the year or certain times of the year (N=351) No problems Copenhagen Average city norm 12 Resident Mood RESIDENTS’ MOOD ABOUT TOURISM R E S I D E N T S 13 Sentiment Index VERY FAIRLY FAIRLY NOT NOT AT ALL Don’t Know A positive resident mood can be converted Proud 39% 44% 6%2% 10% into engagement Growth supporter 37% 44% 9% 2% 7% 81% is very supportive or fairly supportive towards tourism growth, which is very positive. The majority of resident in Copenhagen are proud to Tourist friendly 31% 49% 7%1% 12% see tourists in their city and are happy to welcome them. Interested 21% 53% 10% 3% 13% However, a third of the residents in Copenhagen expresses concerns for the development of peer rental e.g. AirBnb. Peer rental supporter 13% 33% 24% 12% 19% Definitions Considered My town’s tourism policy takes into account the impact on the life of locals Involved 10% 29% 29% 6% 26% Involved I would like to be more involved in decisions concerning tourism in my town The development of private accommodation offerings (such as Airbnb, HomeAway, Peer rental supporter etc.) is good for my town Interested I think the tourism development in my city is interesting Tourist friendly I like to give tourists advice and tips 7% 35% 20% 4% 34% Considered Growth supporter My town should continue to promote itself to attract more tourists Proud I am proud to see tourists who have come from far away to visit my town n = 1076 R E S I D E N T S Resident Mood - Benchmarking Sentiment Index 14 How is the mood of Copenhagen residents compared to the average of other cities? Copenhagen Average cities Min value Max value A positive and supportive mindset, 100% 91% compared to other cities 81% 81% 78% 80% 75% Copenhagen residents feel more tourism-friendly and 70% 71% 71% 60% 56% involved in the tourism development compared to the 60% 60% 54% 55% city norms, but locals in Copenhagen