Original source · versioned page text
2020-01-13 GC Agenda - Item 10 - Attachment 2 - The Value of Tourism to the Noosa Community October 2019 FINAL REPORT
Text sections have not been matched to the original PDF pages. Use the original document to check page numbers.
13 January 2020
General Committee Agenda
Attachment 2 to Item 10
The Value of Tourism
to the Noosa
Community
Tourism Noosa and Noosa Council
October 2019
0 2018_2004 (015) Final Report Oct 2019.docx
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
Large file: the download may take up to a minute.
Searchable page text hides email addresses. Original files are unchanged and may show email addresses.
Full text of sections 2 to 62 (of 109)
Section 2
This Report has been prepared for:
Tourism Noosa and Noosa Council
This report has been prepared by:
C Change Sustainable Solutions Pty Ltd
ABN: 66 858 725 526
m 0414 868 191
w www.cchange.com.au
e [email protected]
together with
SGS Economics and Planning Pty Ltd
1 2018_2004 (015) Final Report Oct 2019.docx
Section 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I
1. INTRODUCTION 1
Structure of the Report 1
2. CONTEXT FOR THE STUDY 2
Tourism’s potential Impacts 2
Methods Used to Determine the Impact of Tourism on the Noosa Community 4
3. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF TOURISM IN NOOSA 9
4. VISITORS’ VIEWS OF NOOSA 13
5. NOOSA’S BUSINESS COMMUNITY’S PERCEPTIONS OF TOURISM IMPACTS 25
6. RESIDENTS’ VIEWS OF TOURISM 40
7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 50
Overall Value of Tourism 50
Summary of Tourism Benefits in Noosa 50
The Extent of Unintended Negative Consequences of Tourism in Noosa 54
Conclusion 57
REFERENCES 60
2 2018_2004 (015) Final Report Oct 2019.docx
Section 4
APPENDIX 1: THE POLICY ENVIRONMENT 61
Tourism Noosa Policy Environment 61
Noosa Shire Policy Environment 63
Summary 67
APPENDIX 2: THE BENEFITS AND IMPACTS OF TOURISM – LITERATURE REVIEW 68
Economic Contribution of Tourism in the Australian Context 68
Social and Cultural Impacts of Tourism 69
Environmental Impacts of Tourism 71
Summary of the potential Benefits and Impacts of Tourism 72
APPENDIX 3: METHODS USED TO DETERMINE IMPACT OF TOURISM 74
Determining Economic Impact and Value of Tourism 74
Community Benefits and Impacts associated with Tourism 74
APPENDIX 4: SURVEY INSTRUMENTS UTILISED 80
Noosa Visitor Survey 80
Noosa Business Survey 87
Noosa Shire Resident Survey (Based on TEQ’s Social Indicators Survey) 90
APPENDIX 5: CHARACTERISTICS OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS 94
Noosa Visitor Survey Respondents’ Characteristics 94
Noosa Business Survey Respondents’ Characteristics 97
Noosa Resident Survey Respondents’ Characteristics 99
APPENDIX 6: COMPARISON OF TOURISM NOOSA’S RESIDENT SURVEY AND
TOURISM AND EVENTS QUEENSLAND’S SOCIAL INDICATORS REPORT 101
3 2018_2004 (015) Final Report Oct 2019.docx
Section 5
Executive Summary
In July 2018, Tourism Noosa, in conjunction with Key Findings
Noosa Council, commissioned C Change
Sustainable Solutions Pty Ltd (C Change) and SGS Based on the research conducted, it can be
Economics and Planning to determine the value concluded that tourism is Noosa’s most valuable
and impact of tourism on the Noosa Community. industry sector, and that the surveyed
The report was commissioned to provide input community perceive substantial benefits from
into the community, council and business Tourism. Respondents also indicated negative
deliberations on Sustainable Tourism and what impacts in a limited number of areas, but the
that means for Noosa. personal impacts of those surveyed were
considered relatively low. Key components of
In particular, the report focussed on the following
these statements are discussed below:
areas:
• The economic impact of tourism on Noosa 1. Tourism is Noosa’s number one industry sector
Shire’s economy; and has important flow on impacts across the
• The perceived benefits of tourism to the Shire.
community as well as unintended negative
impacts; Table A: The economic value of tourism in Noosa 2016/17
• Community attitudes to tourism in Noosa,
Measure Direct Indirect Total
based on social indicators in the Tourism and Employment (total) 3,677 2,108 5,785
Events Queensland’s “Social Indicators 2017” Employment (FTE) 2,648 1,944 4,592
report; and Output/Sales $481 million $525 million $1.0 billion
• Visitor experiences at key sites in Noosa. Value-Added to GRP $262 million $251 million $513 million
Source: National Institute of Economic and Industry Research (NIEIR) 2016.
Compiled by id, verified by SGS Economics and Planning (2019).
As well as review the overall contribution of tourism
to the Australian and Queensland economies, the
consultants also: In 2016/17, tourism provided considerable value added
• Reviewed the Noosa’s research and analysis to to the Noosa economy ($513 million – direct and indirect
date on the value of tourism; impact), and was the number one industry sector in
• Reviewed the policy environment as it related Noosa.
to tourism and events;
• Conducted statistically valid surveys with Tourism creates substantial jobs for the Region (5,785
Noosa businesses (n= 176) and residents (n= direct and indirect ‘total’ jobs, or 4,592 direct and
300); and, indirect FTE jobs.
• Conducted statistically valid visitor surveys at
three of Noosa’s main tourism areas (n= 168). There are significant flow on or indirect benefits through
industry linkages and consumption impacts ($251 million
With the exception of the economic value of in value-added to the economy).
tourism, it is important to note that the study was
focussed on community / business / visitor The significant impact of tourism was reinforced by the
perceptions of impacts as opposed to actual business survey results completed for this study. This
impacts. indicated that 75 percent of businesses would be less
profitable without tourists, and of these, 42 percent
indicated that they would cease operations without the
tourist trade.
i
Section 6
Many businesses surveyed perceived that the surveyed Queenslanders indicated they couldn’t
existence of tourism allowed for further investment think of anywhere they would want to live but their
by public and private sectors. Some businesses current residential address).
surveyed believed the benefits of tourism were not
shared equally between business locations. Many who were surveyed in the Noosa community
recognised that because of tourism there is an
Events in Noosa had a positive impact on the increased number of attractions, entertainment,
majority of businesses surveyed that are most events and facilities that benefit locals and visitors
likely to be impacted by tourism. alike. Some of these people, however, thought that
there was also room for improvement in Noosa’s
Most businesses surveyed that were likely to be night time entertainment opportunities and ‘value
1
directly impacted by tourism indicated that events for money’ of tourism products generally.
produced positive impacts on their turnover. On
average, these businesses indicated that in an event Many residents and businesses surveyed indicated
period, their turnover could increase by around 25 that tourism showcases Noosa and the region in a
percent. positive light – 63 percent of residents indicated that
tourism had a positive impact on Noosa in this regard,
As would be expected, surveyed businesses that compared with 52 percent across the Sunshine Coast
were likely to be indirectly impacted by tourism2 generally, and only 41 percent of Queenslanders.
indicated that events had little impact on their
turnover. People surveyed within Noosa generally agreed that
that as well as assisting the economy, tourism
Only a small proportion of businesses surveyed enhances Noosa’s reputation regionally, nationally
indicated negative impacts due to events. and internationally.
Tourism and events contribute to the social and Approximately a third of respondents from the
cultural environment of Noosa in a significantly residential survey (32 percent) indicated that tourism
positive way. in Noosa enabled the connection of people that
otherwise would not interact. These people
Based on the responses of those surveyed, the acknowledged that interacting with people from
appeal of Noosa and the overall aesthetics of the other cultures and experience adds depth to the
natural and built environment produces community. The comparable statistics for those living
considerable social benefits. on the Sunshine Coast and Queensland were 16
percent and 17 percent respectively.
Nearly 70 percent of residents surveyed in Noosa
indicated that they could not think of anywhere else However, most respondents (over 84 percent)
they wanted to live. This was almost 20 percent surveyed agreed that tourism can disrupt the lives of
higher than residents surveyed across the Sunshine locals, particularly in relation to traffic, congestion and
Coast generally3, and double the proportion parking and restricting local’s access to public facilities.
surveyed across Queensland (only 37 percent of
1 scientific and technical services; administrative and support
Businesses noted as ‘likely to be directly impacted by tourism’
services; education and training; health care and social assistance.
included those businesses identifying as: accommodation services;
retail trade; food services and hospitality; rental, hiring and real
3
estate services; and, arts and recreation services. It is noted that the resident survey conducted for this study
emulated the Tourism and Events Queensland Social Indicators
2 Study. The latest Social Indicators Report completed for
Businesses noted as ‘likely to be indirectly impacted by tourism’
Queensland as a whole was conducted in 2017 – and these results
included those businesses identifying as: agriculture, forestry and
are used as the residential survey comparisons used in the report
fishing; manufacturing; electricity, gas, water and waste water
between Noosa, Sunshine Coast and Queensland. The overall
services; transport, postal and warehousing; information, media and
comparisons of the questions between the Tourism Noosa Survey
telecommunications; financial and insurance services; professional,
(refer Appendix 4) and the TEQ survey can be found in Appendix 6.
ii
Section 7
Tourism is generally sensitive to the environment, The largest negative impacts on the community
but there is room for improvement. from tourism highlighted by this study were
associated with congestion/car parking and housing
Noosa’s policy environment acknowledges the need affordability. Noosa Shire’s policies and strategies
for environmental sensitivity, and Noosa’s visitors acknowledge these issues and there are many
and residents surveyed acknowledged that initiatives in place.
businesses do implement environmental measures.
Nonetheless, this is an area that could be improved, With regard to congestion and parking, amongst
both in practice for businesses and in perception for other things, Council has developed a transport
the wider community. strategy, a transport reference group, and is
working on a range of actions and initiatives to
Overall, 23 percent of people surveyed would like to improve transport choice and accessibility
see tourism growth in Noosa in more throughout the Shire and key popular areas.
environmentally responsive directions. For those
people aged under 30 years of age, 44 percent held With regard to affordable housing, Council’s Draft
this view. By comparison, only 5 percent of Noosa Plan is underpinned by a housing needs
Sunshine Coast residents and 7 percent of analysis, which seeks to address, amongst other
Queensland residents felt this way about tourism. things, issues around housing choice and
Environmentally responsive policies and tourism affordability through increasing medium and high
directions are clear areas of focus for Tourism density housing options and providing incentives for
Noosa and Noosa Council – evidenced through the developers to produce smaller dwellings in areas
establishment of the Sustainable Tourism Reference proximate to activity centres.
Group.
Other less mentioned negative impacts identified by
Tourism does have unintended negative those surveyed included some level of
consequences in Noosa, but the impact on the inappropriate behaviour and increased litter and
community and individuals for most of these noise associated with tourism activity. The
elements is relatively low: perceived impacts of these on the individual were
quite low, but are still worth monitoring over time.
iii
Section 8
1. Introduction
In July 2018, Tourism Noosa in conjunction with Noosa Council, commissioned C Change
Sustainable Solutions Pty Ltd (C Change) and SGS Economics and Planning to determine the
value and impact of tourism on the Noosa Community. In particular, the report was to focus
on the following areas:
• The economic impact of tourism on Noosa Shire’s economy;
• Community benefits of tourism as well as unintended negative impacts;
• Community attitudes to tourism in Noosa, based on social indicators in the Tourism
and Events Queensland’s (TEQ) “Social Indicators 2017” report; and
• Visitor experiences at key sites in Noosa.
With the exception of the economic value of tourism, it is important to note that the study
was focussed on community / business perceptions of impacts as opposed to actual impacts.
Structure of the Report
This report provides the outputs of the research completed for this commission, and is
structured as follows:
• Section 2 provides the context for the study. This notes the policy environment and
its support for tourism as well as outlining the positive and negative impacts of
tourism generally. The methods used to fulfil the objectives of commission are also
noted;
• Sections 3- 6 then provides a discussion of findings from the methods utilised. In
particular:
o Section 3 outlines the economic impact and value of tourism;
o Section 4 notes the findings of the visitors survey;
o Section 5 notes the outcomes of the Business Survey; and,
o Section 6 outlines findings from the resident survey and, where possible,
how these compare to the TEQ social indicators survey results.
• Section 7 brings all information together and provides a summary of findings and
key conclusions from the study.
1
Section 9
2. Context for the Study
Noting that tourism can produce a range of benefits and negative impacts, the study was
commissioned to determine a reliable estimate of the economic value of Tourism to the
Noosa economy, as well as the perception of benefits and negative impacts of Tourism from
a wide range of stakeholders across Noosa – residents, businesses and visitors.
Tourism Noosa and Noosa Council acknowledge the importance of tourism for Noosa and its
community, and are highly committed to ensuring that tourism can flourish while minimising
unintentional negative outcomes.
All key policy documents for Tourism Noosa and Noosa Council acknowledge the important
role tourism plays in Noosa’s economy (refer Appendix 1). They also acknowledge the
interconnection between tourism and the social, cultural and environmental elements
within Noosa.
Tourism’s potential Impacts
The study commenced with a literature review of potential benefits and negative impacts
arising in tourism-rich areas. The detailed outcome of the review is provided in Appendix 2
and a summary of findings is shown overleaf. This summary was used as a basis to draw
conclusions associated with the overall value and contribution of tourism to the Noosa
community.
2
Section 10
Table 1: Potential Benefits and Negative Impacts Associated with Tourism
Potential Benefits Impacts Potential Negative Impacts
associated with Tourism associated with Tourism
Economic
• Considerable value added to an economy • Inflated / high property values impacting on locals
• The creation of jobs (and particularly first home buyers / low to middle
• Indirect benefits to suppliers and flow on impacts of income earners)
wages and spending throughout the economy • Seasonal employment
• Stimulation of expenditure / spending on other • A casualised workforce, minimum wages, minimal
important infrastructure – such as airports and major worker benefits and a narrow range of skills
activity centres4. development opportunities
• Provision of international connections, which can • A tendency to depend on tourism jobs, which
create further business, interaction and learning narrows and makes an economy vulnerable
opportunities. • Detraction of expenditure from local infrastructure
to tourism infrastructure, and the need to invest
more in local infrastructure due to tourism
numbers5.
• A need to maintain currency of the tourism offer in
order to maintain competitiveness with other
tourism destinations
Potential Benefits Potential Negative Impacts
associated with Tourism associated with Tourism
Social
• Increased number of attractions, entertainment, • Affordability issues with property (particularly for
events and facilities that can benefit locals and visitors staff of tourism services), leasing and goods and
• The chance for an area to show case its culture and services
history, solidify identity and increase the sense of • Encroachment of tourism development and services
pride associated with an area over local markets
• Increased interactions between local communities and • Unwelcomed increased in population and congestion
visitors, which can add value and depth to the extent • Potential for disruption to social norms, values or
of cultural experiences and knowledge customs
• Higher level of spending on infrastructure in the local • The commercialisation of culture and eroding of
government area ‘soul’ / identity.
• The provision of a number of jobs and training for
certain demographic groups, particularly youth and
locally employed people.
4
While it is acknowledged that this is an identified benefit from the literature, its complexities have not allowed
investigation of the potential application or otherwise to the Noosa context.
5
While it is acknowledged that this is identified as a potential negative impact associated with tourism in the
literature, its complexities have not allowed investigation of the potential application or otherwise to the Noosa
context.
3
Section 11
Potential Benefits Potential Negative Impacts
associated with Tourism associated with Tourism
Environmental
• Increased recognition, awareness and connection to • Potential for overuse of assets and/or encroachment
key environmental assets/areas of urban uses
• Potential for higher levels of taxes and revenue • Threats to natural resources, increased air and water
streams, which can be channelled into preservation / pollution and increased waste products
conservation / beautification and regeneration. • Local impacts such as increased noise and litter
|
Methods Used to Determine the Impact of Tourism on the Noosa
Community
Several methods were used to determine the impact of tourism on the Noosa Economy. The
methods are summarised here and a full description is provided in Appendix 3. Appendix 4
provides the survey instruments utilised for the study, and Appendix 5 outlines the
characteristics of respondents for each of the surveys conducted.
Determining Economic Impact and Value of Tourism
Prior to the commissioning of this report, Noosa Shire Council had various reports outlining
the economic impact and value of tourism in Noosa. A key component of this commission
was to review and consolidate this information and determine the current likely value of
Tourism for Noosa’s economy.
SGS Economics and Planning reviewed all available data and provided a clear description of
the value of tourism in Noosa. This included turnover, contribution to Gross Regional
Product, value added and employment. Data that was utilised included LUCID economics
reports (Noosa Economic Profile 2018 and Noosa Priority Industries); ID profile of Tourism
and Hospitality Value; and Tourism Research Australia (TRA) Local Government Profiles.
In addition to the value of tourism, this component of the commission considered the
impact of tourism on the local economy in comparison to other industries as well as to
Queensland. This included analysis of employment and value added for industries in Noosa
such that high-value industries could be identified.
The key findings of the report have been included here, and the full SGS Report is included in
the document The Value of Tourism to the Noosa Community, SGS Economics and Planning,
July 2019.
4
Section 12
Visitor Survey
A visitors survey via face to face questionnaires was also conducted as part of this
commission. The questions included centred around the following areas:
• Demographic questions, including where visitors lived and their family
characteristics;
• Purpose & Behaviour, including why visitors came to Noosa, modes of transport to
Noosa in particular, where visitors were staying, where they intended to visit, and
expenditure when in Noosa;
• Awareness, regarding how they knew about Noosa; and,
• The qualities visitors consider important for a holiday and the levels of satisfaction
with Noosa with regard to these factors.
Visitor surveys were randomly conducted from three areas – Hastings Street, Noosa National
Park and Noosa Marina. The survey conducted over a period of 3 weeks by Tourism Noosa’s
volunteers throughout the week and weekends. A total of 168 responses were obtained.
Given that only total respondent numbers were analysed, the results are statistically robust.
Survey of Noosa’s Businesses in Activity Precincts
The business community survey was aimed at determining Noosa’s businesses perceptions
of tourism’s impact on prosperity and liveability. A survey (refer Appendix 4) was
distributed by Tourism Noosa via Survey Monkey to businesses in the following precincts:
Boreen Point, Cooran, Cooroy, Kin Kin, Noosa Civic, Noosa Heads, Noosa Junction,
Noosaville, Peregian Beach, Pomona, Sunrise Beach, Sunshine Beach, Tewantin.
A total of 176 responses were received, and these were distributed as shown in Table 2. In
order to conduct meaningful statistical analyses, and ensure confidentiality, the business
locations were regrouped according to Coastal, Hinterland and Suburban areas. Those with
no location were grouped separately6 (refer Table 3). In addition, and again to enable
meaningful statistical analysis and ensure confidentiality, the industry sectors were grouped
according to businesses likely to have a direct impact from tourism activities and those
according to businesses likely to have an indirect impact or low impact from tourism. The
groupings for these are shown in Table 4.
6
It is noted, however, that apart from the ‘Coast’ category, sample sizes are considered small. Significance tests
using Cramers’ V measures are relatively robust, even with small sample sizes. Nonetheless, output for categories
other than ‘Coast’ should be considered ‘insights’ as opposed to conclusive evidence.
5
Section 13
Table 2: Returned Surveys by Business Precinct
Business Location Responses to
survey
Boreen Point 0
Cooran 0
Cooroy 7
Kin Kin 0
Noosa Civic 1
Noosa Heads 48
Noosa Junction 41
Noosaville 41
Peregian Beach 3
Pomona 2
Sunrise Beach 7
Sunshine Beach 3
Tewantin 14
Prefer not to answer 9
TOTAL 176
Table 3: Survey Respondents by Grouped Precincts
Coast Hinterland Suburban No location
noted
Noosa Heads 48
Noosa Junction 41
Noosaville 41
Sunrise Beach 7
Peregian Beach 3
Sunshine Beach 3
Noosa Civic 1
Cooroy 7
Pomona 2
Tewantin 14
No Location Identified 9
Total 144 9 14 9
6
Section 14
Table 4: Survey Respondents by Expected Impact from Tourism
Direct Impact Indirect No Industry
from Impact from Identified
Tourism Tourism
Accommodation 20
Retail Trade 18
Food Services and Hospitality 15
Rental, Hiring and Real Estate Services 10
Arts and Recreation Services 6
Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing 1
Manufacturing 2
Electricity, Gas, Water and Waste Services 1
Transport, Postal and Warehousing 1
Information, Media and Telecommunications 13
Financial and Insurance Services 6
Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 12
Administrative and Support Services 3
Education and Training 4
Health Care and Social Assistance 6
Prefer not to answer / No answer provided 58
Total 69 49 58
Questions included in the survey were grouped according to:
• Business characteristics: such as industry sector, size of premises, turnover and
employment;
• Impact of tourism on the respondents’ business;
• Impact of major events in Noosa on respondents’ business; and,
• Positive and negative impacts associated with tourism for respondents’ businesses
and Noosa generally.
Noosa Residents’ Survey
A statically valid survey with 300 residents across Noosa was conducted by Q&A Marketing
Pty Ltd utilising a CATI7. This survey emulated the Tourism and Events Queensland Social
Indicators Survey8 and obtained information regarding the following issues:
• Demographic questions
• Residents’ feeling about their local area
• Feelings towards tourism
7
Survey monkey sample calculator indicates that for a population of around 52,000, if results that are required within
a 95 confidence interval and a margin of error of 6 percent, then the sample required is around 270 respondents.
Furthermore, it is noted that the sample size of 300 for Noosa is statically valid as can be demonstrated through a
comparison with the sample size utilised for the TEQ Social Indicators Survey. The TEQ Social Indicators Survey, a
highly respected survey, utilises a 300 across the whole of the Sunshine Coast Tourism Region. Thus, given that the
Noosa Shire is only a portion of this, the sample size used in the Tourism Noosa survey was over 6 times the size of
the TEQ sample size for the Sunshine Coast . Statistical differences were tested through Chi Square and Cramers V
tests.
8
https://teq.queensland.com/research-and-insights/domestic-research/regional-summaries/sunshine-coast/sunshine-
coast-social-indicators-2013
7
Section 15
• Preferred tourism development growth
• Level of contact with tourists
• Extent of Agreement with Positive statements regarding Tourism
• Extent of Agreement with Negative statements regarding Tourism.
Comparisons between the Noosa Residents’ survey and the TEQ survey for the Sunshine
Coast and Queensland are provided in Appendix 6.
8
Section 16
3. Economic Impact of Tourism in Noosa
As identified in all the policy documents for Noosa (refer Appendix 1), Tourism is an
important industry in the Shire. Exports in this context refer to tourism products and service
provided to anyone from outside of Noosa who visits. These visitors bring new money into
the local economy. This money is subject to a ‘multiplier effect’ as the money spent at hotels
or restaurants (for example) is passed on to local suppliers and workers. This money
contributes to the economy via value-added, which is the contribution the industry makes to
gross regional product (GRP) and can be thought of as the revenue gained (sales) minus the
costs. Increasing the amount of money flowing into the local economy is important for
economic development.
Economic development refers to growing a local economy. This means growth in economic
activity such as more exports of local produce or products, or, in relation to tourism, more
visitors spending money in Noosa. Growth, in turn, allows businesses to invest in new
equipment, hire more people and pay higher wages. Greater economic activity also means
higher government revenues and more money to spend on better quality services for the
community. Economic development enables a higher standard of living for people.
The economic benefits of tourism on Noosa have been estimated previously by economy.id
and Lucid Economics.
The economic value of Tourism to Noosa
The id modelling commissioned for Noosa Shire produced estimates of value of tourism and
hospitality via four measures:
• Employment (total): This is an estimate of the number of people employed in the
tourism and industry regardless of their employment status (full-time, part-time,
casual etc.).
• Employment (FTE): FTE employment is simply aggregate hours worked by all
persons employed divided by 38 hours per week to give a full-time equivalent
estimation.
• Output/Sales: Output is the total value of sales generated over a financial year.
• Value-added: Value added is the value of sales generated by an industry, minus the
cost of its inputs (e.g. materials, labour, depreciation, services provided).
The above measures are considered in terms of direct impacts (employment and sales
directly in tourism) and indirect impacts. Indirect impacts are as a result of the flow-on
effects to other related intermediate industries (such as suppliers), as well as the increase in
local consumption created by the wages and salaries of tourism and hospitality workers,
which in turn creates additional employment and sales in other sectors.
Direct measures should be used when referring to the number of workers and value created
in the tourism industry itself. The total value-added and employment estimates (direct plus
indirect) can be used when discussing the overall impact that tourism has on the Noosa
economy as these measures include both the tourism industry itself and the additional
impacts gained from the multiplier effect.
9
Section 17
Table 5 shows the direct and indirect economic impacts of tourism on the Noosa LGA, by the
above four measures.
Table 5: The economic impact of tourism to Noosa 2016/17
Measure Direct Indirect Total
Employment (total) 3,677 2,108 5,785
Employment (FTE) 2,648 1,944 4,592
Output/Sales $481 million $525 million $1.0 billion
Value-Added to GRP $262 million $251 million $513 million
Source: National Institute of Economic and Industry Research (NIEIR) 2016. Compiled by id. Verified by SGS Economics and
Planning (2019)
Utilising these figures therefore, the estimated economic impact of tourism is as follows:
• In 2016/17, the total tourism and hospitality sales in Noosa Shire Council area was
$1 billion. The total value added from these sales was $513 million.
• In 2016/17, there were 3,677 people directly employed in Noosa’s tourism and
hospitality industry, equating to 2,648 FTE jobs.
• With flow-on impacts includes total employment in Noosa attributable to tourism
and hospitality was 5,785, equating to 4,592 FTE jobs.
The Value of Tourism Over Time
Total output of Tourism in Noosa has grown from $645 million in 1999/2000 to $1 billion in
2017/18, an annual average growth rate (AAGR) of 2.6% (adjusted for inflation).
Total value-added has also grown, from $297 million to $513 million between 1999/2000 to
2017/18. This represents an AAGR of 3.3% (adjusted for inflation), even with a slight
decrease from 2015/16 to 2016/17.
Visitor numbers are also growing. Since 2010/11 the number of visitor nights (international
and domestic) in Noosa has increased by 29%, with an AAGR of 3.7%. Including day-trips, the
AAGR is even higher at 4.3% per annum.
Over the same period, the AAGR of visitor nights (international and domestic) in Queensland
has been 3.5% per annum, and 3.3% including day trips.
These figures indicate that since 2010/11 Noosa, as a tourist destination, has been
outperforming Queensland as a whole in attracting visitors in proportional terms. The
tourism industry in Noosa has been increasing its market share, even with a small decrease
in visitation in 2017/18.
Tourism compared to Other Industries in Noosa and Queensland
Not all industries are equal in terms of their impact on the local community. Some industries
draw export income into the local economy (manufacturing or tourism), some provide
higher wages for workers than others, while others might have positive side effects like
brand building or street vitality (creative arts and hospitality for example).
10
Section 18
By the direct value-added to GRP measure, the five most valuable industries in Noosa are:
• Health Care and Social Assistance ($249.5 million)
• Construction ($198.7 million)
• Rental, Hiring and Real Estate Services ($190.9 million)
• Retail Trade ($186.3 million)
• Professional, Scientific and Technical Services ($176.8 million)
Estimates of value-added for the tourism industry have been estimated by id in a separate
modelling exercise. Economy.id estimated the direct value-added from tourism at $262
million, which would make it the largest industry in Noosa, above health care and social
assistance.
The significant impact of tourism was reinforced by the business survey results completed
for this study. The outcomes of the survey indicated that of those who responded, 75
percent of businesses indicated they would be less profitable without tourists, and of these,
42 percent indicated that they would cease operations without the tourist trade.
It is noted that tourism is not a separately recognised industry and is estimated by taking
value-added from tourism-related industries such as accommodation and food services, arts
and recreation, and retail, amongst others. Accommodation and food services as a stand-
alone industry ranks 7th, with a value-added of $165 million.
If basing regional development policy on the theory of comparative advantage, government
should focus on developing industries where they have a natural, historical or social
advantage, as this would give the local community the best chance of sustainable long-term
growth. Tourism is well positioned in this regard and therefore is maintained as a focus. As
well as tourism generally, industries with competitive strengths in Noosa (based on an LQ
analysis) are:
• Accommodation and Food Services
• Rental, Hiring and Real Estate Services
• Administrative and Support Services
• Professional, Scientific and Technical Services
• Retail Trade
• Financial and Insurance Services
Some industries are highly focused on selling to the local population while others are export
industries. The mix between sales and exports can tell you about the nature of the industry
in the area. The accommodation and food services (and much of retail trade), in the context
of Noosa, is an export industry.
Accommodation and food services produce the highest export value ($202 million) for
Noosa and is the only industry sector that sells more goods and services to non-resident
households or businesses than those based locally. Retail trade ($118 million), health care
and social assistance ($93 million) are the second and third largest industry sectors based on
exports.
Exports in the context of accommodation and food services and retail trade refer to tourism
products and service provided to anyone from outside of Noosa who visits. These visitors
11
Section 19
bring new money into the local economy. This money is subject to a ‘multiplier effect’ as the
money spent at hotels or restaurants (for example) is passed on to related suppliers and
servicing business (the population/industry servicing industries). This is reflected in Noosa
by the prominence of rental, hiring, financial and insurance services and real estate services
and administrative and support services. These supporting industries help lock money into
the local economy.
Professional, scientific and technical services and financial and insurance services are
important, and high value per workers, industries in Noosa economy. These industries
provide an opportunity to diversify from a reliance on tourism. Analysis of incomes found
that the median wage in Noosa is lower than Queensland generally (as is the proportion of
workers who work full-time). It was found that workers in the accommodation and food
services and retail industries have a lower proportion of individuals earning a high income
($91,000 per annum or more) and a higher proportion of low-income persons (less than
$26,000 per annum) compared to the entire workforce in Noosa. These three industries are
strongly linked to tourism in Noosa. The importance of tourism to the local economy is one
likely factor in the median income bracket in Noosa being lower than Queensland. Other
factors could include the high average age of residents (48) indicating a smaller workforce.
According to the 2016 ABS census, 30% of families in the Noosa Shire consisted of a couple
where both are not working, compared to a rate of 20% for Queensland.
Health care and social assistance, and education, are important industries based on value-
added to GRP, but according to the LQ analysis, are currently no more prominent in Noosa
than it is in regional Queensland more generally. But given the rise of the wellness industry,
adult education and Noosa’s natural advantages, opportunities exist to grow health care and
education exports.
Finally, a noticeable characteristic of the Noosa economy is industry diversification. No one
industry dominates across the factors considered. This finding is supported by Lucid
Economics who reported in the Noosa Economic Profile that compared with recent years,
the Noosa economy is more diversified and better equipped to absorb changes to the
tourism sector.
Diversifying the economy is an aim for Council. Noosa Shire Council has developed priority
industry measures that are used to track economic diversification. These priority industries
are identified in Lucid (2018), Noosa Priority Industries 2018. These measures and
underlying methodology will be reviewed as part of Council’s Local Economic Plan review.
To drive economic development, Noosa needs nationally and (ideally) internationally
competitive businesses that can accelerate future growth. These businesses are most
effective if linked to growth industries that can generate new value-added for the LGA. As
outlined above, these opportunities exist for the Noosa Shire.
These industries will create jobs, increase the scale of trade in goods or services outside
Noosa, attract talent and investment and foster something unique that differentiates the
Noosa from its economic competitors – and tourism will be a key contributor.
12
Section 20
4. Visitors’ Views of Noosa
As noted previously, a visitor survey with 168 respondents was conducted in Noosa over a
three week period. Given that results were analysed with regard to overall behaviour, the
sample size was considered robust9. The following provides the findings of the survey.
Survey output is discussed with regard to:
• Purpose
• Behaviour;
• Awareness of Noosa; and,
• Important Qualities when planning a trip and Satisfaction with Noosa in regards to
these elements.
Purpose
Most survey respondents’ main reason for visiting Noosa was associated with holidays,
leisure and recreation (87 percent overall). There were statistical with the visitors’ different
residential locations, with more local people visiting friends and relatives, and proportionally
more people from ‘other Queensland’ visiting Noosa due to education and training
purposes.
Figure 1: Respondents’ purpose for visiting Noosa, by residential address
120%
Elsewhere on Sunshine Coast (n=25)
Other part of South East Queensland (n=28)
100% Other Queensland (n=11)
Interstate (n=44)
International (n=56)
80% Total Visitor Respondents (n=164)
60%
40%
20%
0%
Holidays, leisure and Visiting friends and relatives Education and training Business or professional
recreation
9
Category numbers with less than 30 responses analysed should be treated as insights as opposed to
evidence.
13
Section 21
The most popular reasons for visiting Noosa for survey respondents are shown below.
Almost every respondent indicated that they choose to come to Noosa for the beaches (94
percent of all respondents). Other popular reasons included for relaxation, for the national
park, food and restaurants and outdoor activities/adventures. The river was in the five most
popular responses for day visitors and people from elsewhere in the Sunshine Coast. The
quality of accommodation was also in the top 5 responses for ‘other Queenslanders’ and
those aged 45-60.
Figure 2: Respondents’ reasons for choosing to visit Noosa on this trip (n=168)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
…
ts
e
n
es
r
e
s
s
ns
es
n
or
ve
rk
al
sid
ur
io
io
an
iti
h
io
oc
ng
Pa
Ri
at
at
nt
ac
ry
cil
ur
ct
di
fl
od
lax
ve
Be
nt
ra
l
ta
fa
na
ed
yo
ad
m
Re
tt
ou
s
n
ti o
re
w
ta
m
lit
io
s/
C
Na
d
co
e
ita
t
i
tie
ea
s
li
an
Vi
c
sp
ivi
na
fa
cr
od
ho
re
ct
so
yo
Fo
ra
er
nd
nd
l it
oo
(p
ta
sa
a
Qu
td
nt
en
es
ve
Ou
li n
m
re
in
nd
la
rta
ie
icu
te
Fr
rt
En
pa
A
14
Section 22
Table 6 Respondents’ reasons for choosing to visit Noosa on this trip, by various respondent
characteristic
Top Reasons
Relaxation
restaurant
adventure
activities/
Quality of
accommo
Food and
to Choose
National
Outdoor
Beaches
dation
Noosa
Parks
River
Total Percent (n=168)
All Visitor 94% 64% 58% 46% 33% 28% 13%
Responses
Gender (n=168)
Male 95% 64% 63% 37% 39% 30% 5%
Female 98% 68% 57% 57% 28% 27% 21%
Residential Address (n=164)
Elsewhere on 92% 65% 77% 65% 31% 58% 4%
Sunshine Coast
Other part of 96% 71% 57% 50% 43% 43% 14%
South East
Queensland
Other 91% 73% 55% 55% 27% 46% 27%
Queensland
Interstate 100% 77% 50% 59% 34% 18% 23%
International 96% 53% 62% 26% 31% 13% 6%
Age Group (n=168)
up to 30 97% 65% 64% 38% 39% 19% 6%
30-45 97% 60% 68% 43% 43% 38% 5%
45-60 100% 69% 53% 69% 22% 36% 28%
60+ 86% 71% 43% 43% 14% 29% 19%
Type of Visit (n=164)
Day visitor 96% 65% 73% 44% 35% 42% 4%
Overnight only 94% 56% 61% 39% 44% 11% 11%
More than one 97% 68% 53% 50% 31% 26% 17%
night
15
Section 23
Important Qualities and Satisfaction with Noosa
Survey respondents were asked a series of questions regarding the extent to which certain
elements were important when they were on holidays. They were then asked to rate the
same elements in terms of their quality in Noosa. The top 5 important elements when on
holidays for respondents included:
• The quality of beaches
• Access to beaches
• General cleanliness
• Ease of walking around, and
• Good service.
Other elements that are important are shown in the figure below.
In terms of ‘quality’, as can be seen below, Noosa rated, on average, between good and very
good on the top five elements. Even though the quality of all elements were rated positively
for Noosa, the least positive elements in Noosa were:
• Parking facilities
• Evening entertainment and
• Value for money.
Figure 3: Important elements when on holiday, and quality of elements in Noosa
5.0
Very Important / Excellent
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
Importance
2.0
Quality
1.5
Not Important / Very Poor
1.0
ice
rt
rta d o
n d i on
ch
fin es/a g fa e
ch
ls
ns
of l pro ey
s
ire ture s
Sh nt
s
s
d
m on
ge
ng
es
rk
tie
ur
id
Go o un
ca
po
e
ea
tio
on
ea
na
pi
i
v
ys
at
Pa
to
li n
to
ct
m
i li
lo
r
r f ans
op
se
fb
b
p
ig
m
d
tr
te
ar
in
c
an
s
al
y
nd ng o
o
o
s
un
ilie
l
yo
od
Qu nm e f or
tr
n
st
k
le
l
na
al
tio
co
am
m
lc
ic
n
te
in
s
it
ie
ti
w
e
e
io
ng dv e
l
a
au /Na
co
al
rk
ea
ub
ra
en
u
ng
Fr
c
nt
to
ct
l
Ac
Qu
ac
Pa
Va
ne
s/
P
i
fo
g
e
le
nt
in
Ge
ur
ab
/d
gs
ou
en
ra
o d n at
ity
ti
ro
in
rr
g
ivi
Ev
Th
in
vi
al
Su
di
Go t o
ct
st
en
be
re
ra
ss
of
of
ce
ay
oo
ce
se
Ac
W
td
en
Ea
Ou
id
Ev
Questions regarding the appropriateness of the number of car parks were also asked in the
visitors’ survey. Not surprisingly, the more local / regional a visitor was, and/or if the visitor
was a day tripper, the more likely they were to say that Noosa did not have enough car
parks. Important elements for visitors’ regarding car parking planning was (n=155):
16
Section 24
• Close to beach (50 percent)
• Close to shops/attractions (15 percent)
• Free parking that is timed (12 percent)
• Maintaining an area’s natural appeal (9 percent)
• More disabled provision (2 percent)
• Clear signposting (1 percent).
Figure 4: Respondents’ views regarding whether Noosa needs more carparks, by Visitors’
residential address (yes=more car parks needed)
100%
Elsewhere on Sunshine Coast (n=26)
90% Other part of South East Queensland (n=27)
Other Queensland (n=9)
80%
Interstate (n=43)
International (n=50)
70%
Overall % (n=155)
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Yes No
Figure 5: Respondents’ views regarding whether Noosa needs more carparks, by type of
visitor (yes=more car parks needed)
80%
Day visitor (n=47)
70% Overnight only (n=18)
More than one night (n=90)
60%
Overall % (n=155)
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Yes No
17
Section 25
Survey respondents were also asked the importance of environmental practices in their
holiday planning. They were also asked to rate their experience of environmental practices
in Noosa. On average, respondents indicated that environmental practices were important,
and their experience in Noosa’s of these were, on average, good (for encouragement of
active transport) to just below good (waste recycling opportunities, plastic free, water
conservation and renewable energy use). There were some statistical differences with these
ratings depending on the type of visitor (day tripper, overnight, longer stayer), with day
trippers being more likely to rate Noosa marginally higher on all elements than other types
of visitors, and 30-45 year olds rating Noosa marginally lower on all elements except waste
recycling.
Figure 6: Respondents’ views regarding the important of environmental measures when on
holiday, and extent to which Noosa practices these elements
5.0
Very Important / Excellent
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
Importance
2.0
Quality
1.5
Not Important / Very Poor
1.0
Waste recycling Plastic free businesses Evidence of renewable Water conservation Encouragement of
opportunities (ie no plastic straws, energy usage (ie solar, measures active transport (such
bags or single use electric) as bike lanes, walking
bottles) areas)
Behaviour
Approximately 48 percent of survey respondents (n=168) indicated that the trip they were
taking was their first trip to Noosa. Proportionally, first timers were much more likely to be
international visitors than any other category. Respondents that had been to Noosa many
times before in the last 12 months were more likely to be people from other places on the
Sunshine Coast, other South East Queenslanders or people from other parts of Queensland.
There was a spread of age groups associated with first timers versus having visited Noosa on
a number of occasions in the last 12 months.
18
Section 26
Figure 7: The number of visits to Noosa in the last 12 months by visitor respondents (n=164)
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
First time 1-3 times 3-10 times More than 10 times
Figure 8: The number of visits to Noosa in the last 12 months, by Visitors’ residential
location
90%
Elsewhere on Sunshine Coast (n=26)
80% Other part of South East Queensland (n=27)
Other Queensland (n=9)
70% Interstate (n=43)
International (n=50)
60% Total Visitors (n=155)
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
First time 1-3 times 3-10 times More than 10 times
19
Section 27
Figure 9: The number of visits to Noosa in the last 12 months, by Visitors’ age group
70%
Up to 30 (n=70)
60% 30-45 (n=37)
45-60 (n=35)
50% 60+ (n=21)
Total Visitor Respondents (n=163)
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
First time 1-3 times 3-10 times More than 10 times
Of those people staying overnight or longer in Noosa on their trip, the accommodation
utilised by the highest proportion of respondents was hotel/motel/resort (43 percent). A
number of other means, such as Air BnB, youth hostels and caravans were also mentioned
(each of these accounting for 10 percent or less of respondents). There were statistical
differences between accommodation type and age group, with people under 45 years of age
indicating more of a variety of accommodation types than people over 45 years of age.
Figure 10: Accommodation Type utilised by Visitors in Noosa (n=164)
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
se
an
l
e
rt
nB
es
g
ng
e
m
ri n
so
st
ou
ti v
av
pi
rB
ho
Ho
te
e
m
th
r
la
l/r
Ai
Ca
ca
ay
Ca
re
es
h
e
ut
lf-
lid
ot
Gu
or
se
Yo
ho
l/m
s
nd
d
n
e
te
Ow
e
nt
Ho
fri
Re
of
es
m
Ho
20
Section 28
Most of Noosa’s main attractions were cited as areas the respondents were likely to visit
during their stay, with Hastings Street and Noosa National Park being the top two areas (69
percent and 58 percent of all respondents indicated that they were visiting these areas
during their stay). Other popular areas included Noosaville, Noosa Junction, Sunshine Beach
and Eumundi. A smaller proportion indicated that they were going to Noosa’s Hinterland or
other relatively local destinations. These results did not statistically differ between any
major visitor characteristic.
Figure 11: Places visited by Visitors during their visit in Noosa (n=164)
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
n
e
t
h
ti n
nd
h
um
h
t
k
di
ou
e
i ll
ar
ac
tio
ac
ac
un
re
la
av
an
lP
ol
ok
be
Be
Be
nc
St
er
m
os
rw
Co
na
lo
Ju
nt
Eu
w
ne
an
gs
No
Te
io
on
bo
nt
Hi
in
a
gi
hi
t
os
ou
st
in
Na
go
re
ns
a
os
No
Ha
ra
Pe
M
La
Su
a
No
os
ar
Ne
No
Approximately 67 percent of all visitors surveyed indicated that they travelled to Noosa by
car – either as a driver of their own car, or driver as a hired car, or as a passenger in a car.
Approximately 15 percent utilised public transport and 13 percent walked. As might be
expected, local, regional and Queensland residents were more likely to drive, and interstate
and international visitors were more likely to catch public transport and walk.
21
Section 29
Figure 12: Mode of transport utilised by Visitors to get to Noosa (n=164)
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Car as driver Car as driver Car as passenger Public Transport Walked Taxi/Uber Bicycle
(own / friend’s / (hired)
company’s)
Figure 13: Mode of transport utilised by Visitors to get to Noosa, by Visitors’ place of
residence
90%
Elsewhere on Sunshine Coast (n=25)
80% Other part of South East Queensland (n=28)
Other Queensland (n=11)
70%
Interstate (n=44)
60% International (n=56)
Total Visitor Respondents (n=164)
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Car as driver Car as driver Car as passenger Public Transport Walked Taxi/Uber Bicycle
(own / friend’s / (hired)
company’s)
22
Section 30
The average spend on the day of the survey for visitor respondents was $272, with the
majority of this being directed to accommodation costs and transport costs. The variation
between different visitor characteristic is shown below. Statistical differences were found
for accommodation, food and drink and spending on clothes for visitors from various
residential addresses, age of visitor and type of visitor. Research conducted by TRA in 2017
indicated that average spend per night for international visitors was $91 and domestic
visitors was $197. Findings from the visitor survey conducted for this research indicates that
the TRA estimates for domestic visitors might be conservative.
Table 7: Expenditure on the day of the survey, by various Visitor characteristics
consumption) (n=145)
drink (i.e. take-away /
Total Spent Today
Hiring equipment
Accommodation
groceries) (n=112)
Entrance Fees /
Other shopping
Other food and
Tickets (n=111)
Buying clothes
Tours (n=106)
Food / Drink
Travel costs
(Average)
(immediate
(n=108)
(n=148)
(n=139)
(n=116)
(n=101)
Total
Average All Respondents
Total $272 $116 $75 $2 $6 $68 $24 $20 $13 $9
Residential Address
Elsewhere on Sunshine Coast $105 NA $44 $4 $0 $36 $21 $0 $2 $7
Other part of South East Queensland $393 $202 $49 $2 $8 $93 $37 $62 $18 $21
Other Queensland $534 $192 $133 $14 $0 $97 $65 $28 $25 $7
Interstate $331 $146 $102 $0 $12 $106 $23 $19 $8 $4
International $203 $83 $73 $0 $6 $40 $10 $12 $19 $8
Gender
Male $256 $87 $89 $2 $4 $73 $21 $17 $12 $6
Female $298 $143 $62 $2 $8 $63 $26 $23 $15 $11
Age Group
up to 30 $188 $70 $60 $1 $10 $47 $15 $21 $12 $8
30-45 $280 $87 $116 $9 $0 $72 $34 $6 $3 $10
45-60 $398 $195 $64 $0 $3 $91 $35 $42 $20 $10
60+ $369 $165 $82 $0 $8 $91 $17 $8 $19 $1
Type of Visitor
Day visitor $97 NA $21 $3 $0 $35 $14 $14 $10 $8
Overnight only $275 $109 $92 $3 $0 $73 $25 $24 $4 $6
More than one night $366 $161 $99 $2 $10 $84 $28 $23 $16 $9
23
Section 31
Awareness
The majority of survey respondents either knew about Noosa through friends and relatives
(40 percent), or they simply previously knew about Noosa prior to their trip (34 percent).
Those that were aged 60 or over were most likely to have known about Noosa prior to their
trip, and those up to 45 years of age were most likely to have known about Noosa based on
family and friends. Only 11 percent of people indicated that they knew about Noosa
through social media. Of the international visitors, 59 percent indicated that they knew
Noosa through friends or relatives.
Figure 14: How visitors knew about Noosa, by age group
60%
Up to 30 (n=70)
30-45 (n=37)
50%
45-60 (n=35)
60+ (n=21)
40% Total Respondents (n=163)
30%
20%
10%
0%
si t
e
t
t
ia
s
re
ti
n
ive
ur
ed
nt
ge
vi
ou
ch
t
Ce
m
us
la
la
ab
o
re
e
io
l
br
n
ia
av
ew
s/
io
ev
c
ay
So
Tr
nd
at
pr
kn
li d
rm
ie
A
t
Ho
Fr
us
fo
Ij
In
or
sit
Vi
24
Section 32
5. Noosa’s Business Community’s Perceptions of Tourism
Impacts
As noted in Section 2, businesses across Noosa’s Business Precincts were sent a
questionnaire via Survey Monkey. The business community was asked a series of questions,
and 176 responded to the survey. The overall sample size was statistically valid, and cross
tabulations performed were tested for statistical differences between business sentiments
according to location and likely impact on business from tourism:
• Location was stratified by coast versus suburban versus hinterland:
o Coastal - 144 businesses;
o Suburban – 14 businesses;
o Hinterland – 9 businesses;
o 9 other businesses did not indicate a location; and,
• Businesses were also analysed by them more likely to be directly impacted by
tourism or indirectly impacted by tourism:
o Directly impacted tourism businesses10 – 69 businesses; or
o Businesses likely to be indirectly impacted by tourism11 – 49 businesses.
o 58 business did not provide an industry category.
For location, it is noted, that, apart from the ‘Coast’ category, sample sizes are considered
small12. Although significance tests using Cramers’ V measures are relatively robust (even
for small sample sizes) answers associated with locations other than ‘Coast’ as insights as
opposed to conclusive evidence.
The outcomes of the analysis included businesses’ thoughts on:
• The impact of tourism and events on their business;
• The impact of tourism and major events in Noosa generally;
• What positive and negative issues were associated with tourism in Noosa.
Findings from the business survey are discussed below.
10
Businesses assumed to be directly impacted by tourism included those that categorised themselves as:
Accommodation; Retail Trade; Food Services and Hospitality; Rental, Hiring and Real Estate Services; and Arts and
Recreation Services
11
Businesses assumed to be indirectly impacted by tourism included those that categorised themselves as:
Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing; Manufacturing; Electricity, Gas, Water and Waste Services; Transport, Postal and
Warehousing; Information, Media and Telecommunications; Financial and Insurance Services; Professional,
Scientific and Technical Services; Administrative and Support Services; Education and Training; and, Health Care
and Social Assistance
12
A general rule is that any outcome that is utilising a sample where a n>30 should be treated as insights only.
25
Section 33
The Impact of Tourism on Respondents’ Businesses
Of those that responded to the business survey, on average, businesses indicated that
around 60 percent of their turnover came from outside the Sunshine Coast13. Analysis
completed by location (ie. coastal, suburban, and hinterland businesses) indicated that, on
average, coastal businesses followed the overall result, hinterland businesses received a
higher proportion of their turnover from outside the Sunshine Coast (nearly 70 percent) and
suburban locations had a lower proportion (56 percent). As noted, however, hinterland
businesses sample sizes were considered small.
Figure 15: Noosa Businesses’ sources of Turnover, by Business Location
40
Coast (n=82)
35 Hinterland (n=6)
Suburban (n=11)
30
Percentage of Turnover
25
20
15
10
5
0
Residents of Noosa Elsewhere in the Elsewhere in South Other Queensland Interstate visitors International
Shire (%) Sunshine Coast (%) East Queensland (%) (%) visitors (%)
(%)
Recall that businesses were also stratified into those that were likely to have a direct impact
from tourism versus those who were likely to have an indirect impact from tourism.
Businesses included in the ‘direct’ impact category included those classified under the
following industries:
• Accommodation services; retail trade; food services and hospitality; rental, hiring
and real estate services; and, arts and recreation services.
Businesses categorised as likely to have an ‘indirect’ impact from tourism were those that
were classified under the following industries:
• Agriculture, forestry and fishing; manufacturing; electricity, gas, water and waste
water services; transport, postal and warehousing; information, media and
13
Of those respondents who indicated how estimations of the source of turnover were made, 34 percent indicated
they used postcode analysis, and 38 percent noted it was anecdotal information. On-line ordering (8 percent) and
other means not stated (20 percent) were also utilised. Thirty five (35) percent of respondents did not indicate how
they came up with their source of turnover.
26
Section 34
telecommunications; financial and insurance services; professional, scientific and
technical services; administrative and support services; education and training;
health care and social assistance.
Figure 16: Noosa Businesses’ sources of Turnover, by Businesses with Direct versus Indirect
Impacts from Tourism
40
Direct Impact Industry (n=69)
35 Indirect Impact Industry (n=49)
30
Percentage of Turnover
25
20
15
10
5
0
Residents of Noosa Elsewhere in the Elsewhere in South Other Queensland Interstate visitors International
Shire (%) Sunshine Coast (%) East Queensland (%) (%) visitors (%)
(%)
Businesses that are likely to have a direct impact from tourism indicated that their turnover
from interstate was likely to be twice as large as those businesses that have an indirect
impact from tourism.
These findings are consistent with the output associated with business’s profitability (refer
figure overleaf), with over 75 percent indicating that they would be less profitable without
tourists – and of these, 42 percent indicated that they would cease operations without
tourists. As would be expected, there were statistical differences between industry types,
with nearly four times as many businesses with expected direct impacts from tourism
indicating that they would not be operational without tourists (57 percent versus 17 percent
for direct and indirect impacts from tourism respectively). There was no statistical
difference between the impacts of tourism on profitability between different business
locations.
27
Section 35
Figure 17: Noosa Businesses’ dependency on Tourism, by Businesses with Direct versus
Indirect Impacts from Tourism
70%
Direct Impact Industry n=61
Indirect Impact Industry n=35
60%
Total Business Respondents n=104
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
My business’s My business’s My business’s My business’s Tourists detract from
profitability relies on profitability benefits profitability benefits profitability does not the profitability of my
tourists, and without from tourists, and from tourists, but it benefit from tourists business
them I wouldn’t be without them I would wouldn’t make much
operating be less profitable difference for my
business without the
The seasonality of tourism does not seem to impact Noosa, at least with respect to Business’
overall staff numbers. There was only marginal difference (and no statistical difference)
between the average number of Noosa business’ staff numbers in the peak periods versus
non-peak periods. On average, the number of full time, part time and casual staff for the
business’ who responded to the survey are as shown below:
Table 8: Numbers of Staff for Noosa Businesses, by Peak versus Non-Peak Periods
Average Staff Full Time Staff Part Time Staff Casual Staff
Numbers
Peak Periods 7.38 3.19 9.99
Non-Peak Periods 7.14 3.16 8.27
With regard to attracting good staff, keeping good staff and future planning for businesses,
suburban businesses were, on average, the most positive about tourism’s impact and
hinterland businesses the least positive. Nonetheless, on average, all businesses indicated
that tourism’s impact was positive overall. Those businesses who are likely to be directly
impacted by tourism also indicated more positive responses regarding staff attraction,
retention and business planning.
28
Section 36
Figure 18: Tourism’s impact on Staff Attraction, retention and future planning, by Business
Location
5.0
Tourism's impact is very positive on...
4.5
Rating: 1 = negative; 3=No opinion; 5 = very positive
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
Coast (n=85)
2.0 Hinterland (n=5)
Suburban (n=11)
1.5
Tourism's impact is very negative on...
1.0
Attracting good staff Keeping good staff Future planning for Future planning for staff
stock/equipment numbers
requirements
Figure 19: Tourism’s impact on Staff Attraction, retention and future planning, by
Businesses with Direct versus Indirect Impacts from Tourism
5.0
Tourism's impact is very positive on..
4.5
Rating: 1 = negative; 3=No opinion; 5 = very positive
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
Direct Impact Industry (n=60)
2.0 Indirect Impact Industry (n=35)
1.5
Tourism's impact is very negative on...
1.0
Keeping good staff Attracting good staff Future planning for Future planning for staff
stock/equipment numbers
requirements
29
Section 37
Over 100 businesses in the 176 sample size offered an opinion on the ease or otherwise of
securing affordable housing for themselves and their staff in Noosa. Fifty five (55) percent
indicated that there were issues in securing affordable housing, 31 percent indicated there
were no problems, and 14 percent were undecided. Of those who felt there were issues
associated with obtaining affordable housing in Noosa, general comments indicated the
following:
• Housing and accommodation is expensive generally, and there is a shortage of
options, particularly in coastal areas.
• Many staff live outside Noosa because of affordability issues. Due to this, people
need to travel further to work and must have cars due to affordability issues. This
increases parking issues, and parking is difficult.
• Affordability issues are exacerbated because of the low wages in the service sectors.
• Young people find it difficult to remain living in Noosa due to affordability as do
working families.
Some people offered suggestions regarding the needs for staff housing. This included
supporting:
• The development of affordable apartments in the activity centres. This would
support housing options as well as provide businesses with additional custom/trade.
• The development of more one bedroom and studio apartments specifically targeted
to local service staff.
• Targeting certain areas that would be ripe for housing (e.g. vacant/unused land,
other specific areas such as Noosa Heads Bowls club, transport nodes).
Over half of all businesses (52 percent) undertook renovations every 5 years, and there was
no statistical difference between businesses that were directly or indirectly impacted by
tourism. However, on average a third of businesses that were directly impacted by tourism
undertook renovations every 12 months, whereas the same statistic for businesses indirectly
impacted by tourism was 13 percent.
Figure 20: Frequency of Renovations / Upgrades, by Businesses with Direct versus Indirect
Impacts from Tourism
60%
Direct Impact Industry
(average time for renovations = 4.8 years)
Indirect Impact Industry
50% (average time for renovations = 6.7 years)
Total Business Respondents
(average time for renovations = 5.6 years)
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Every 12 months Every 5 years Every 10 years Over 10 years or more
30
Section 38
The impact of major events on Businesses
Businesses were asked whether their turnover was impacted from major events in Noosa
and 103 businesses responded to this question. On average, 53 percent of businesses
indicated that their turnover was positively impacted, and only 14 percent indicated that
they were negatively impacted. Of those positively impacted (53 percent) the average
positive increase was 25 percent across businesses, but 30 percent for businesses likely to
be directly impacted by tourism, and 9 percent for those indirectly impacted by tourism.
Those that were negatively impacted by events (14 percent) indicated that they could lose
anywhere from 9 percent (businesses indirectly impacted from tourism) and 32 percent of
turnover (businesses directly impacted from tourism) during a major event.
Figure 21: Impacts of Major Events, by Businesses with Direct versus Indirect Impacts from
Tourism
70%
Direct Impact Industry
Indirect Impact Industry
60% Total Business Respondents
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Don't know Very Negatively Negatively No Impact Positively Very Positively
Figure 22: Average Impacts of Major Events, by Businesses with Direct versus Indirect
Impacts from Tourism
Percent of Businesses Average Positive
positively impacted (n=103) Impact From Events (n=73)
Direct Impact Industry Businesses 77% 30%
Indirect Impact Industry 17% 86%
Total Business Respondents 53% 25%
Percent Average Negative
Negatively impacted (n=103) Impact from Events (n =73)
Direct Impact Industry Businesses 15% -32%
Indirect Impact Industry 14% -55%
Total Business Respondents 14% -20%
31
Section 39
The perception of tourism’s impact on Noosa from Business respondents
Businesses were also asked questions about their views regarding tourism’s impact on
Noosa generally. On average, businesses agreed that employment is positively impacted
because of tourism, but that this also makes businesses vulnerable to seasonal changes and
downturns in tourism numbers. While coastal and suburban businesses generally felt that
Council, the private sector and their own business invest more because of tourism,
hinterland businesses did not feel the same about these issues. Hinterland businesses in
general also did not feel there were more employment opportunities because of Noosa’s
tourism appeal. This is interesting given that hinterland businesses indicated that the
majority of their custom / trade was due to visitors to the region. It is noted, however, that
the ‘hinterland’ category had a small sample size.
Regardless of whether businesses are likely to be directly impacted by tourism or not, most
agreed that employment is assisted by tourism, but again that this makes businesses
vulnerable to downturns. Businesses that are only likely to be indirectly impacted by
tourism did not feel that employment opportunities in their business were assisted by
tourism or that they had been able to invest more in their business. Businesses indirectly
impacted by tourism did agree, on average, that Council and the private sector invests more
in Noosa because of tourism.
Figure 23: Businesses’ response to Tourism Statements, by Business Location
5.0
Strongly Agree
1=strongly disagree; 3=neutral; 5=strongly agree
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
Coast (n=85)
2.0
Hinterland (n=5)
1.5 Suburban (n=11)
Strongly Disagree
1.0
There are more Noosa is very reliant on Council invests more in There are more The private sector Because of the benefits
employment tourism which makes infrastructure because employment invests more in Noosa of tourism, I have been
opportunities in Noosa local businesses of the level of tourism opportunities in my because of the level of able to invest more in
generally because of vulnerable to seasonal in Noosa business because of tourism my business than I
tourism visitation changes and Noosa’s tourism appeal otherwise would have
downturns in tourism
32
Section 40
Figure 24 Businesses response to Tourism Statements, by Businesses with Direct versus
Indirect Impacts from Tourism
5.0
Strongly Agree
1= strongly disagree; 3=neutral; 5 = strongly agree
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0 Direct Impact Industry (n=61)
1.5 Indirect Impact Industry (n=35)
Strongly Disagree
1.0
There are more Noosa is very reliant on There are more Because of the benefits Council invests more in The private sector
employment tourism which makes employment of tourism, I have been infrastructure because invests more in Noosa
opportunities in Noosa local businesses opportunities in my able to invest more in of the level of tourism because of the level of
generally because of vulnerable to seasonal business because of my business than I in Noosa tourism
tourism visitation changes and Noosa’s tourism appeal otherwise would have
downturns in tourism
Positive and negative issues associated with tourism in Noosa
Business respondents were asked to provide general comments regarding their views on
positive and negative impacts of tourism on Noosa and their business. The overall results
are shown in the figures below. The top 6 responses from Businesses from different location
types are shown in the tables following the graphs.
All businesses agree that the highest benefit of tourism is that more money is spent in the
economy, and most agreed that tourism assists promotion of the area nationally and
internationally.
Overwhelmingly, the main negatives associated with tourism were traffic congestion and
parking. Thirty six (36) percent of the 103 businesses providing comments indicated that
congestion was an issue for their business, and 52 percent indicated it was an issue for
Noosa generally. Parking was nominated by 20 percent of businesses as an issue for their
business and 41 percent of businesses felt this was an issue for Noosa generally. It is noted
that Council is well aware of these as issues, and has developed a transport strategy, a
transport reference group, and is working on a range of actions and initiatives to improve
transport choice and accessibility throughout the Shire and key popular areas.
Environmental impact and overcrowding of areas were also considered to be main impacts
for Noosa as a whole. A number of businesses indicated that there were no negative
impacts to their business (31 percent) and 16 percent indicated that there were no negative
impacts on Noosa generally.
33
Section 41
M M
or or
em em
o o
Pr n ey Pr n ey
om s om s
o t p en o t p en
io t io t
n in n in
of e of e
th con th con
ea o Be ea o
re my tt r m
a er In ea y /s
na /sup o c cr e na up
tio po cu as tio po
In na rt pa ed na rt
M cr e lly s lo n c st lly s lo
o r as y f af an ca
e v ed Bet an d cal or f n d l e
t
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
10%
15%
20%
25%
0%
5%
0%
5%
isi st er in eco
to af t ac um int co
c e n
r s f n atm ern nom M Gr om bers rna om
to um os ati y or ea mo /e tio y
G i In c to b p o ev te d m na
v e re Gr wn ers her nall
ea /d /e e ( y… isi r p at pl l
s c as t to ro io n oy m ly…
o n ed er ive mp vib rs P fi /
fid am p r r s loy e) to ro tab h igh en t
to mo ilit ra
Be enc en Im ofit ity o me
p w t y/ te
tt e i t ro ab il f vi n t
er to ies v i s Ne n/d io n rev e s
w ive of b nu
o c lo c – n Gr ed ty/r itor cli r si u e
cu al um ow inf ev s Be en ty sin
pa bu b th ra en t t ts o f es
n c si er of str ue er /r
y f ne an th u c e vi s
o s e t Gr atm tu r sito
Im r ac s/co d qu b u ure Im ow os n c rs
pr c o m al sin p p
ov m m ity e In rov I th he lien
es m un (s ss cr n o r t
o ea es b cr e f th e (v s
se ra as e ib
Co b ra d a ity c hop
34
un n d tio oh s,… d n e d b u e)
bu d o p si
cil of n/h es In sin f N ed n e
m No ig ion cr
ea s
Lo New aint os h ra se Le ess o os estr s
ca a a t d ad to a ian
s (
ls clie ins (qu es am b q s
ca n ar al O t o us ua
t M eni It is ffse ho ine lity
Im n p a s/re ea b ity)
pr rti tu et
ak tie e
es s – ve s th e p sa t m ss )
ov ci rn te it ry u le
v i num thi e d o rch s
Le ed pate clie r
ad lan i ab n a
M Inc s
nt
ak r e d n s le ber g/im wn ses
to a se
es as Of t o h /ho eve n p a
it e fs o m n Gi
ve re d ac so
v i d bu ets me e v ts sc O p m a i qua t i s n
ab t a on p o n a lity tot
comments (note businesses could make more than one comment)
le sine h e p ur lu e
t s d c fid r t ( al
It o re s to ow h as en At tun Noo sho
is m n e ce O tra itie sa ps
ev ai bus sea s to utr ct s /h ,…
er n a i n s o lo eac Imp s st fo r om
y t t es n ca h ro af lea e
n=162 comments (note businesses could make more than one comment)
hi No s s
n l b an v e f t rn
u s d d o t in
Ou In g/i osa ale i e i h g
tre A cr e mp /h o s Lo nes d u nfra e a
t
ac tra ase act m ca s/c ca st re
h d e ls o m tio ru a
an cts pe is to ca n c
d sta d e ta n mu im tur
ed ff st l pa n p e
uc to ria rti ity rov
at th ns cip co ed
io e at he
n e
im are in sion
pr a ev
ov en
ed ts
Figure 25: Comments regarding positive tourism impacts on respondents’ businesses:
Figure 26: Comments regarding positive tourism impacts on Noosa generally: n=186
Section 42
Tr Tr
af af
En f ic f ic
v ir co co
ng ng
on
m e st e st
en io io
ta n/ St n/
l im de af de
l
l ay fin ay
pa
ct s/ g Be s/
ro -r ne ro
- a a
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
0%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
0%
5%
wi d eli
an fit
s d
ld clo ce ar clo
e su
issue for their business
lif su on
Le e/ re no Lo re
ss nat s ca ts ca s
en No ur Pa su pr ls Pa
jo e/ r k
al ea av rk
ya te en in st d oi in
bl no g af
f/ be d g
e ug
v ir
yo th
at on str
m h O m ug nd e ar
Be os c ap ve e Ne gle ev e a
ne ph rc nt en
fit ac ro
No ga
er ity w Le te tiv to g ta
sa e / / i d s s n e et r e
re le nf in Ac ou im r a
To no ss ra g ce enjo gh p a ig h
o ts at st ss ya ca ct ts
m p tra ru
c iss bl p o ta
uc re c t u e ac n ff
h ad tiv re ue at ity b
re be e/ s/ m
Ac lia In yo lif ha
rd o s
/in usin
e
ce nc cr es ph fra ss
indicated parking was an issue for Noosa generally
ss e ea nd ty to er st
r
iss o se ev le f in e/
u e n to in en d le
s
Ov uctu
s/ ur ga ta (b er re
ha ism Lo rb r ea us s at
in tra
cr
ow
rd ag
to /o
th
ca e/ es
se c t d in
f in er ls w Ev s/ ive/ g
av as
d gr oi te en ac
c
lif
e
(b ow d tsd om s ty
us th
35
in th e
Un
ev et m l
es or ar en er od e
St U se in ea
tu re at
s/ ve To gu io
af Fin nev a s o rn n)
fin a nc
en cc
om
tm m o v lar
g- tu en uc er vis
re ia
l– rn m t… h t it
lia od re hr or
Af ov
e a lia Fin ou s
nc
e fo rt tio nc an In gh
rd e cr
on ab
hr n) on c ia e a Ru y e
ca
ou l– s e de a r
ilit gh to A in
su
al y /d y En ur ga pe
ea v ir ism ffor op
st ep r on Los d rb
le
af
f/ re m e /o
th
ab ag
cia en th ilit e/
str
ug Ru t io ta e er y/ w
gle de n l im day gr
ow
de as
te
Ev pr
comments (note businesses could make more than one comment)
en to pe pa tri th ec
o ct pp
ts ge pl - er or iat
de e in io
Ne te
tr
ig wi to v n
ga rr ht ld ur
lif ist estm
tiv
e
eg sta e/ s w en
n=130 comments (note businesses could make more than one comment)
ul ff na
im ar tu it t…
pa vis re h ev
ct ito /e
nv e nt
on rs ir o s
bu nm
sin
es en
s t
Cr Cr
im im
e e
* 52 percent of businesses nominated traffic congestion as an issue for Noosa generally, and their business and 41 percent
* 36 percent of businesses nominated traffic congestion as an issue for their business, and 20 percent indicated parking was an
Figure 27: Comments regarding negative tourism impacts on respondents’ businesses:
Figure 28: Comments regarding negative tourism impacts on Noosa generally: n=162
Section 43
Table 9: Summary of Top 6 Positive Impacts of tourism on Respondents Businesses, by
Business Location
Top 6 Positive impacts of tourism on Respondents’ Businesses
Coastal Hinterland Suburban
More money spent in More money spent in More money spent in
economy/supports local economy/supports local economy/supports local
economy economy economy
Promotion of the area Better occupancy for More visitors to town/diversity
nationally and internationally accommodation/high rates of visitors
(awareness)
Increased staff Increased business to business Promotion of the area
numbers/employment sales nationally and internationally
(awareness)
Better occupancy for (no further issues noted) Promotion of business
accommodation/high rates
Greater profitability/revenue Better occupancy for
accommodation/high rates
Promotion of business Increased business to business
sales
Table 10: Summary of Top 6 Positive Impacts of tourism on Noosa generally, by Business
Location
Top 6 Positive impacts of tourism on Noosa
Coastal Hinterland Suburban
More money spent in Improved infrastructure More money spent in
economy/supports local economy/supports local
economy economy
Promotion of the area More money spent in Promotion of the area
nationally and internationally economy/supports local nationally and internationally
(awareness) economy (awareness)
Better atmosphere (vibe) Promotion of the area Greater profitability/revenue
nationally and internationally
(awareness)
Increased staff Better atmosphere (vibe) Better atmosphere (vibe)
numbers/employment
More visitors to town/diversity Gives confidence to local More visitors to town/diversity
of visitors business/community cohesion of visitors
Greater profitability/revenue Improved infrastructure Improved infrastructure
36
Section 44
Table 11: Summary of Top 6 Negative Impacts of tourism on Respondents Businesses, by
Business Location
Top 6 Negative impacts of tourism on Respondents’ Businesses
Coastal Hinterland Suburban
Traffic congestion/delays/road Parking Traffic congestion/delays/road
closures closures
Parking (no further issues noted) Locals avoid the area
Benefits are not spread beyond Parking
event area
Staffing - reliance on casual Negative impact on business
staff/struggle to get right staff
Locals avoid the area Overcrowding
Not enough Rude people
capacity/infrastructure
Table 12: Summary of Top 6 Negative Impacts of tourism on Noosa generally, by Business
Location
Top 6 Negative impacts of tourism on Noosa
Coastal Hinterland Suburban
Traffic congestion/delays/road Traffic Traffic
closures congestion/delays/road congestion/delays/road
closures closures
Parking Parking Environmental impact -
wildlife/nature/environment
None/minimal Overcrowding Parking
Overcrowding Not enough Overcrowding
capacity/infrastructure
Environmental impact - Locals avoid the area None/minimal
wildlife/nature/environment
Not enough Too much reliance on Less enjoyable
capacity/infrastructure tourism/other growth or atmosphere/less
investment not occurring attractive/lifestyle
Environmental Footprint of Businesses
Ninety two (92) of the 176 businesses responded to the questions associated with trying to
reduce their environmental footprint in Noosa. Of those that did respond, most were
comments related to recycling (89 percent), and nearly 60 percent of businesses considered
themselves ‘plastic free’. The use of renewable energy and water conservation measures
were more associated with hinterland businesses and suburban businesses indicated they
were more inclined to encourage active transport. It is noted that there are small sample
sizes for hinterland and suburban businesses, so these outcomes should be viewed as
insights as opposed to conclusive evidence of practices. Other types of environmental
37
Section 45
measures employed by some businesses included being a paperless environment and having
mindful purchasing practices. One respondent indicated that they did not consider it wise to
encourage active transport measures such as riding bikes to work due to the congestion and
dangers of road travel.
Figure 29: Environmental practices employed by businesses, by Business Location
100%
Coast (n=76)
90% Hinterland (n=5)
Suburban (n=10)
80%
Total Business Respondents (n=92)
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Waste recycling (ie Plastic free (ie no Use of renewable Water Encouragement of Other
cans, glass, plastic, plastic straws, bags energy usage (ie conservation active transport
composting) or single use solar, electric) measures (such as bikes,
bottles) walking)
Overall desires regarding future visitor numbers
Overall, businesses in Noosa acknowledged the important impact of tourism on their
business and Noosa generally. When questioned about what they would like to see happen
to visitor numbers in the future, 68 percent of all businesses responding indicated that they
would like to see increases (and 18 percent of these indicated significant increases would be
most desirable). There were no significant statistical differences between locations of
businesses, but those more directly impacted by tourism were more likely to want higher
increases (84 percent versus 49 percent for those industries indirectly impacted by tourism).
Only 2 percent of businesses directly impacted by tourism surveyed wanted decreases. The
same statistic for indirectly impacted businesses was 14 percent.
38
Section 46
Figure 30: Businesses’ desires regarding the growth or otherwise of tourism in Noosa, by
Businesses with Direct versus Indirect Impacts from Tourism
60%
Direct Impact Industry (n=69)
Indirect Impact Industry (n=35)
50% Total Business Respondents (n=111)
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
No Opinion Decrease Decrease No Change Increase somewhat Increase
significantly somewhat significantly
39
Section 47
6. Residents’ Views of Tourism
As noted in Section 2, a residential CATI survey was conducted by Q&A Research with 300
residents across Noosa to determine their views on a number of issues associated with how
they feel about their local area, and specific information on their perceptions of tourism
impacts.
The sample size of 300 for Noosa is statically valid as can be demonstrated through a
comparison with the sample size utilised for the TEQ Social Indicators Survey. The TEQ
Social Indicators Survey, a highly respected survey, utilises a 300 across the whole of the
Sunshine Coast Tourism Region. Thus, given that the Noosa Shire is only a portion of this,
the sample size used in the Tourism Noosa survey was over 6 times the size of the TEQ
sample size for the Sunshine Coast14.
Survey respondents were stratified according to age and location:
• Age groups:
o Under 30 years of age – 59 respondents
o 30-64 year olds – 121 respondents
o 65 year olds and over – 120 respondents
• Residential Location:
o Coastal/Eastern Beaches (Peregian to Sunshine) – 79 respondents
o Noosa Heads & Noosaville – 127 respondents
o Tewantin – 51 respondents
o Hinterland/North Shore (Cooroy to Kin Kin) – 43 respondents
Statistical differences were tested through Chi Square and Cramers V tests but few statistical
differences between residential locations in Noosa found. There were a number of
statistical differences between age groups, and a few statistical differences between views
from different family type and length of time spent living in Noosa. Where statistical
differences between categories were found, they are commented upon in the discussion
below.
The survey of Noosa residents used the same questions and format of the Tourism and
Events Queensland (TEQ) Social Indicators survey to enable comparison of Noosa resident’s
perceptions against, the wider Sunshine Coast region15 and Qld. The output from the survey
is indicated below, and a full comparison between Tourism Noosa’s survey and TEQ’s results
for the Sunshine Coast and Queensland is provided in Appendix 6.
Residents’ feeling about their local area
Of the 300 respondents in the resident’s survey, 68 percent indicated that they really liked
living in Noosa, and could not imagine living elsewhere. This is a much higher percentage
14
Furthermore, for a population of around 52,000 (Noosa’s population), a sample of around 270 is
considered statistically valid for a confidence level of 95 percent and margin of error 6 percent (Survey
Monkey Sample Calculator).
15
It is noted that TEQ’s area ‘Sunshine Coast’ refers to the Sunshine Coast region, as opposed to the
Sunshine Coast Council area. As such, outcomes attributed to the Sunshine Coast includes Noosa
residents too.
40
Section 48
than the outcome that TEQ found in 2017 for the Sunshine Coast as a whole (54 percent of
people indicated they couldn’t imagine living elsewhere) and considerably higher statistic for
TEQ’s findings on Queensland’s residents generally (only 37 percent of Queenslanders
surveyed in the TEQ survey indicated they could not imagine living anywhere else but their
current residential area). There were significant differences by age group and household
type, with people over 30 being more likely to not want to live elsewhere when compared to
those under 30 (49 percent of people under 30 indicated they could not think of other
places they wanted to live. The same statistic for people aged 30 to 64, and 65+, was 71 and
75 percent of respectively). An additional 47 percent of people aged under 30 said they
liked living in Noosa, but there were other places they would equally enjoy. Couple families
without children had the highest proportion of people indicating that they could not imagine
living anywhere else.
Figure 31: Residents’ views regarding living in Noosa, by age group
80%
Up to 30 yrs (n=59)
70% 30-64 yrs (n=121)
65+ yrs (n=120)
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
I really like it, I cant think of anywhere I enjoy living here but can think of I only live here because circumstances
else I would rather live other places I would enjoy equally demand it and would prefer to live
somewhere else
41
Section 49
Feelings towards tourism
Survey respondents were asked to select a statement that best reflected their thoughts
regarding tourism in Noosa. Significant statistical differences were found with age group but
no other demographic or locational characteristic. Of the 300 responding, nearly 80 percent
of all respondents indicated that they either strongly approved (36 percent) or slightly
approve (43 percent) of tourism because it’s good for the community and economy. People
aged between 30 -64 were more likely to strongly approve, and people aged up to 30 or
over 65 were more likely to slightly approve. Only 4 percent of total respondents strongly
disapproved of tourism in Noosa. The Sunshine Coast and Queensland areas had similar
statistics to these in the TEQ survey.
Figure 32: Residents’ views regarding tourism in Noosa, by age group
50%
Up to 30 yrs (n=59)
45%
30-64 yrs (n=121)
40% 65+ yrs (n=120)
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
I strongly approve of I slightly approve of I neither approve nor I slightly disapprove of I strongly disapprove of
tourism, on balance it tourism and the minor disapprove of tourism tourism as I need to tourism and stay away
is great for the inconveniences it as it does not affect me adjust my lifestyle to from places where
community and causes because on positively or negatively avoid the tourists go because I
economy balance it is good for inconveniences dont want anything to
the community and associated with do with the
tourism
42
Section 50
Preferred tourism development growth
When asked about their preferred development growth for tourism, half of the 300
respondents indicated that they were happy with tourism growth and would like to see it
continue and/or grow – either as it is (27 percent) or in a different direction, such as
environmentally responsive (23 percent). The same proportions for the Sunshine Coast as a
whole in 2017 were 52 percent and 5 percent. Of the remaining 50 percent, 42 percent
indicated that they were happy with how tourism had grown to date, but did not want to
see an increase. Only 8 percent indicated they would like to see less growth (the same
statistic for the Sunshine Coast as a whole in 2017 from TEQ’s survey was 6 percent).
The highest proportion of people in the Noosa survey that indicated that they would like to
see growth but in a different direction (such as through more environmentally responsive
practices) were people under 30 (44 percent).
Figure 33: Residents’ views regarding preferred tourism development growth, by age group
60%
Up to 30 yrs (n=59)
30-64 yrs (n=121)
50%
65+ yrs (n=120)
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
I am happy with the way I am happy with the way I would like to see less I would like to see more
tourism is developing in my tourism has developed in my tourism in my local area tourism growth in my local
local area and would like to local area but would not like area but in a different
see it continue to see it grow any more direction, such as
environmentally responsive
Level of contact with tourists
Residents were asked about the level of contact they had with tourists and nearly 40 percent
of all respondents (n=300) indicated that while they see tourists, they do not usually interact
with them (unless they are specifically approached by tourists). This is a smaller proportion
than people across the Sunshine Coast, of which TEQ reported that 57 percent indicated
that they generally do not interact with tourists (refer Appendix 6).
Those most likely to interact with tourists in Noosa in a social sense are aged over 65 (26
percent of respondents aged over 65), and those most likely to interact with tourists due to
their employment are aged 30-64 years (26 percent).
43
Section 51
In general, 15 percent of Noosa respondents indicated that they had made friends with
tourists and stayed in contact with them for the duration of the tourists’ stay only (9
percent) or over the longer term (6 percent). This was higher than the statistics for the
Sunshine Coast as a whole in 2017 (6 percent and 3 percent respectively).
Figure 34: Residents’ level of contact with Tourists, by age group
45%
Up to 30 yrs (n=59)
40% 30-64 yrs (n=121)
35% 65+ yrs (n=120)
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
I never come into I see tourists I often interact I often meet I have made friends I have made friends
contact with around but dont with tourists as tourists around with tourists during with tourists and
tourists as far as I usually speak to part of my job town and talk to their stay in my kept in contact
am aware them unless they them local area after they have left
ask for direction
etc.
Extent of Agreement with Positive statements regarding Tourism
A number of positive statements were posed to respondents, and the respondents were
asked to indicate the extent to which they agreed with them. Over 90 percent of
respondents agreed that tourism is positive because it introduces people from different
backgrounds and cultures, that festivals and events can assist in non-peak periods and raise
awareness of the region generally, and that tourists stimulate the economy. These statistics
were similar to the TEQ’s 2017 results for the Sunshine Coast as a whole.
Between 80 and 86 percent of respondents also agreed that tourism helps showcase the
region, instils pride in the local and broader community and increases community
infrastructure and services. Outcomes for the Sunshine Coast in these matters varied from
87 percent (instilling pride regionally) to 71 percent (instilling pride locally).
In Noosa, only 47 percent of respondents indicated that the benefits of tourism are spread
evenly throughout the community. This was similar to the Sunshine Coast’s statistic of 46
percent of respondents.
Respondents were also asked to indicate the extent of impact each of these elements had
on their lives, and the extent to which they felt Noosa as a whole was impacted. On
average, the overall responses to the extent of impact was all in the positive, with
respondents feeling that the overall community benefited more than they did personally.
44
Section 52
Highest levels of positive impact for individuals were in the areas of more services and shops
due to tourism, and having an increased sense of pride in the area. When compared by age
group, people aged under 30 and between 30-64 indicated that they benefited more than
people over 65 when it came to cultural diversity, festivals and events and economy impacts
from tourism. Residents from Noosa Heads and Noosaville were more likely to indicate that
tourism increased pride in the region when compared to the rest of the areas, and residents
from Tewantin and Hinterland areas indicated the least level of personal benefit from
tourism with regards to the economic impacts. These people were also the most likely to
feel that the benefits of tourism were not spread evenly throughout the region.
Figure 35: Proportion of Residents that agree with the positive tourism statements
Total Resident Respondents that agree… (n=300)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Tourism brings Festivals and Events Tourism is good for Tourism showcases Living in an Because of tourism The benefits of
people from attract tourists in the community our region in a attractive tourism there are better tourism are shared
different non-peak periods because the money positive light. This destination instils shopping, dining evenly across the
backgrounds and and raise awareness that visitors spend helps to promote a pride in local and/or recreational local community
cultures into the of the region when they come to more robust residents and the opportunities in the
community the region helps to economy, improve broader community region
stimulate the property values,
economy, stimulates business and
employment employment
opportunities, and is opportunities
good for local
business
45
Section 53
Figure 36: The average impact on residents and the community as a whole with regard to
positive tourism statements
Very Positive Impact
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Tourism brings Festivals and Events Tourism is good for Tourism showcases Living in an Because of tourism The benefits of
people from different attract tourists in the community our region in a attractive tourism there are better tourism are shared
backgrounds and non-peak periods because the money positive light. This destination instils shopping, dining evenly across the
cultures into the and raise awareness that visitors spend helps to promote a pride in local and/or recreational local community
-1.00 community of the region when they come to more robust residents and the opportunities in the
the region helps to economy, improve broader community region
stimulate the property values,
economy, stimulates business and
employment employment Impact on personal life (n=300)
opportunities, and is opportunities
-2.00
good for local Impact on community as a whole (n=300)
business
Very Negative Impact
-3.00
Figure 37: The average impact on residents with regard to positive tourism statements, by
age group
Very Positive Impact
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
Tourism brings Festivals and Events Tourism is good for Tourism showcases Living in an attractive The benefits of Because of tourism
people from different attract tourists in the community our region in a tourism destination tourism are shared there are better
backgrounds and non-peak periods because the money positive light. This instils pride in local evenly across the shopping, dining
cultures into the and raise awareness that visitors spend helps to promote a residents and the local community and/or recreational
-1.00 community of the region when they come to more robust broader community opportunities in the
the region helps to economy, improve region
stimulate the property values,
economy, stimulates business and Up to 30 yrs (n=59)
employment employment
opportunities, and is opportunities 30-64 yrs (n=121)
-2.00
good for local
business 65+ yrs (n=120)
Very Negative Impact
-3.00
46
Section 54
Extent of Agreement with Negative statements regarding Tourism
Noting that tourism can have unintended negative impacts too, a series of negative
statements were also posed to survey respondents. Most respondents (over 84 percent)
agreed that tourism can disrupt the lives of locals, particularly in relation to traffic,
congestion and parking and restricting local’s access to public facilities. The impacts
individuals felt and their perceptions of the impact of the community as a whole associated
with tourism were somewhat negative (an average score of around -1 to -1.3, where -3 is
‘very negative’ and 0 is no impact).
In addition, respondents noted that other disruptions from tourism can include increasing
property values and the price of goods and services (around 80 percent), and impacting the
environment through litter, pollution and/or natural damage to area (75 percent).
Respondents noted that, on average, the individual impact of these impacts were not large,
but that there were somewhat negative impacts for the environment from a community
perspective (an average score of -1.04, where -3 is ‘very negative’ and 0 is no impact).
Around 63 percent of respondents felt that the character of the region had changed, but the
impact on individuals and their perception to the community as a whole was negligible.
Less than half the respondents felt that tourism was associated with people behaving
inappropriately, and less than a third of respondents felt that too much public money was
spent on developing facilities for tourists that should otherwise go to local public facilities
and services.
With regard to other demographic and locational characteristics, people who lived in
Tewantin and the Hinterland felt that there were more negative impacts on property values
and the cost of goods and services when compared with their coastal counterparts.
However, the impact indicated on the community by respondents was well less than -1 (-
0.41 and -0.61 for Tewantin and Hinterland respectively, where -3 is ‘very negative’ and 0 is
no impact).
In terms of statistically significant age group differences, people between 30-64 were more
likely to assess higher negative personal impact associated with restrictions to public
facilities due to tourism (-1.3 compared to -1.06 for people under 30 and -0.82 for people
over 65, where -3 is ‘very negative’ and 0 is no impact), and people between 30-64 rated a
higher, but still marginal impact on them due to the region changing because of tourism (-
0.24). People aged below 30 indicated a slightly positive impact on them and the
community at large given the region changing (a score of 0.56 for individual impact and 0.39
for community impact, where 3 is very positive and 0 is no impact). People over 65 also
indicated that the regional changes due to tourism were marginally positive on average for
the region (0.23, where 3 is ‘very positive’ and 0 is no impact).
The proportion of people in Noosa that agreed that there were negative impacts associated
with tourism was much higher than those in the Sunshine Coast as a whole. But still, the
overall impact of the issues were considered quite low to minimal.
47
Section 55
Figure 38: The proportion of residents that agree with negative tourism statements relating
to Noosa
Total Resident Respondents that agree… (n=300)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Tourism can Tourists, at busy The increase in Tourism leads to Tourism can Because of Tourism can be Too much public
sometimes disrupt times, can restrict property values, increases in the impact on the tourism the associated with money is spent on
the lives of local local residents due to Noosas prices of some environment character of the some people developing
residents and add access to public appeal, makes it things such as through excessive region has behaving facilities for
to traffic facilities more difficult for some goods and litter and/or changed inappropriately tourists
congestion, some people to services and/or pollution and/or
parking difficulties live in the area property values damage to natural
and excessive areas
noise
Figure 39: The average impact on responding residents and the community as a whole with
regard to negative tourism statements
3.00
Very Positive Impact
Impact on personal life (n=300)
2.00
Impact on community as a whole (n=300)
1.00
0.00
-1.00
-2.00
Very Negative Impact
-3.00
Tourism can Tourists, at busy The increase in Tourism leads to Tourism can impact Because of tourism Tourism can be Too much public
sometimes disrupt the times, can restrict local property val ues, due increases in the prices on the environment the character of the associated with some money is spent on
lives of local residents residents access to to Noosas appeal, of some t hings such as through excessive region has changed people behaving developing facilities
and add to traffic public facilities makes it more difficult some goods and litter and/or pol lution inappropriately for tourists
congestion, parking for some people to live services and/or and/or damage to
difficulties and in the area property val ues natural areas
excessive noise
48
Section 56
General Comments from Residents in Noosa
Respondents were given the opportunity to make general comments at the end of the
survey if they so wished. Below is a summary of issues noted. Many indicated that while
there are some negatives associated with tourism in Noosa, and that these need to be
managed better, tourism still is a positive for Noosa.
Table 13: General Positive and Negative Comments about Tourism from Residents
General Positive % of General Negative % of
respondents respondents
Comments (n=230) Comments (n=230)
Tourism positive for our area 17% Traffic concerns/congestion 19%
Area is based on tourism, we 14% Need to restrict growth/keep it 16%
need tourism for the area to under control
survive
Good for economy 10% Pollution and environmental 14%
concerns (protect wildlife,
litter, air pollution)
Good for jobs 7% Parking issues 14%
Good for community 7% Need for more public 10%
transport/free busses
Good for businesses 7% Too much focus on tourists/not 9%
on residents (coast/hinterland
also)
Community needs to adjust/deal 5% Need more 8%
with it services/facilities/infrastructure
Great to have events (vitality, 3% Residential is overpriced due to 7%
energy, bringing people in) tourism
Positive as provides more 3% Too many events 7%
services – number and variety
Negative impact on 6%
community/character
Accommodation – more variety 6%
but Airbnb impacts tourism
49
Section 57
7. Summary and Conclusion
Overall Value of Tourism
The policy environment in Noosa recognises the importance of Tourism to the economy, and
rightly so. The value of tourism in Noosa is substantial and the tourism industry is the
highest contributor to the value-added component of Noosa’s Gross Regional Product. It is a
growing industry in Noosa and has almost doubled its worth to the economy over the last
decade.
With an estimated direct value add of some $262 million in 2016 and an indirect value-
added impact of $251 million, tourism’s overall contribution to the economy is nearly half a
billion dollars per annum.
The tourism industry sustains a significant number of jobs in Noosa, and supports other
industry sectors through supplier chains and consumer impacts. It has been estimated that
employment numbers in tourism was around 3,677 direct jobs (or 2,648 EFT jobs) in 2016,
and that these numbers give rise to a further 2,108 indirect jobs (or 1,944 EFT jobs) through
industry and consumption linkages. Thus tourism is contributing to in excess of 5,700 jobs
(or 4,600 FTE jobs) in the Noosa community.
The significant impact of tourism was reinforced by the business survey results completed
for this study. The outcomes of the survey indicated that of those who responded, 75
percent of businesses indicated they would be less profitable without tourists, and of these,
42 percent indicated that they would cease operations without the tourist trade.
Utilising the value-added to GRP measure, the industry with the closest level of impacts to
tourism is Health Care and Social Assistance ($249.5 million). In comparison, the
construction industry sector has been estimated to be worth nearly $200 million to the
Noosa economy, and Professional, Scientific and Technical Services $180 million.
It is noted that tourism is not a separately recognised industry and its worth is estimated by
combining value-added components from tourism-related industries such accommodation
and food services, arts and recreation, and retail, amongst others. Accommodation and food
services as a stand-alone industry ranks 7th, with a value-added of $165 million.
Summary of Tourism Benefits in Noosa
As well as the actual value generated for the economy from tourism, there are other
benefits to a community associated with tourism and tourism industries. Based on the
research conducted for this commission, a summary of the extent to which Noosa
experiences economic, social and environmental benefits from tourism is provided below.
50
Section 58
Table 14: Summary of Noosa’s Economic Benefits associated with Tourism
Potential Economic Evidence of Benefit in Noosa:
Benefits Results from Analyses
• Considerable value üüü • Economic Analysis: The analysis completed from the id modelling
added to an economy by SGS Economics and Planning indicated that tourism is the
highest earning sector in Noosa’s economy. Tourism provides a
substantial number of jobs and indirectly creates value to a
number of other industries.
• Business Survey: Most within the business community who
• The creation of jobs üüü participated in the survey acknowledged the importance of
tourism to the economy and the importance of it to job creation /
retention, regardless of whether the businesses were directly
impacted by tourism or indirectly impacted by tourism. Over 75
percent of businesses indicated that their profitability would be
negatively impacted if tourism was to decrease, and of these 42
• Indirect benefits to üüü
suppliers and flow on percent indicated that if tourism was not present, they would not
impacts of wages and be operating. Coastal and suburban businesses, on average, also
spending throughout acknowledged that because of tourism the Council and private
the economy industries invested more in Noosa. No mention of international
connections was made by any sector of the business community,
and this could be an area for highlighting into the future.
• Resident Survey: The survey respondents from the resident
survey acknowledged the considerable contribution of tourism to
the economy of Noosa, with over 80 percent of residents indicated
• Provision of üü
international that they approved of tourism due to the wider benefits it brings.
connections, which On the contrary, only 14 percent disapproved of tourism.
can create further • Visitors Survey: Questions regarding expenditure by visitors were
business, interaction asked and results showed that considerable direct spends are
and learning made by tourists. The information indicated that the TRA research
opportunities. on spend by visitors may be conservative.
• Impact of events: Most businesses that were likely to be directly
impacted by tourism indicated that events produced positive
impacts on their turnover. On average, these businesses indicated
that in an event period, their turnover could increase by around 25
percent. Only a small proportion of businesses indicated negative
impacts, and most of those businesses indirectly impacted by
tourism indicated that events had little impact on their turnover.
51
Section 59
Table 15: Summary of Noosa’s Social Benefits associated with Tourism
Potential Social Evidence of Benefit in Noosa:
Benefits Results from Analyses:
• Increased number of üüü • Business Survey: On average, regardless of direct or indirect
attractions, impact of tourism, businesses in Noosa acknowledged that the
entertainment, number of attractions, entertainment, events and facilities would
events and facilities not be as appealing if tourism was not present in the community.
that can benefit locals Over half of the businesses surveyed indicated that events in
and visitors Noosa helps to increase their profitability. The average increase of
turnover for businesses from events was 25 percent across
businesses (with 30 percent for businesses likely to be directly
impacted by tourism, and 9 percent for those indirectly impacted
by tourism). Without prompting, approximately 28 percent of
• The chance for an üüü
area to show case its businesses indicated that tourism assist with promoting the areas,
culture and history, and as acknowledged above, on average, businesses agreed that a
solidify identity and higher level of spending from the Shire as well as private industry
increase the sense of occurs due to the substantial numbers of tourists. Although no
pride associated with direct acknowledgement of the provision of jobs for youth and
an area local people, suburban and coastal businesses did note, on
average, that tourism helps assist attract and retain good staff.
• Resident Survey: Residents generally agreed that tourism brought
• Increased interactions üü a number of social benefits to Noosa. Between 80 percent and 94
between local percent of respondents agreed that because of tourism and
communities and events, Noosa experiences: more people from different
visitors, which can backgrounds and cultures; an increase in awareness from people
add value and depth outside the region; higher property values, and more business and
to the extent of employment opportunities; higher levels of pride in area and
cultural experiences region; and better shopping, dining and/or recreational
and knowledge opportunities in the region. Over half of the residents surveyed
indicated that they personally interacted with tourists, either
• The provision of a üü through their jobs or simply due to the tourists being in Noosa,
number of jobs and with people under 30 years of age most likely to remain friends
training for certain with tourists.
demographic groups,
particularly youth and • Visitors Survey: Results from the visitor survey indicated that
locally employed most respondents were coming to Noosa for a holiday. Almost all
people. visitors (94 percent) indicated that the beaches were one of the
key reasons they were attracted to Noosa. Other popular reasons
for Noosa included having a chance to relax (64 percent), visiting
the National Park (58 percent), the food and restaurants (46
percent), outdoor activities / adventures (33 percent) and the river
(28 percent). Visitors were not specifically asked about their level
of interaction with locals, but on average, most people agreed that
there were friendly locals.
52
Section 60
Table 16: Summary of Noosa’s Environmental Benefits associated with Tourism
Potential Evidence of Benefit in Noosa:
Environmental Results from Analyses:
Benefits
• Increased üüü • Visitors Survey: One of the top 5 reasons many people cited for
recognition, visiting Noosa was because of the National Park (58 percent of
awareness and all respondents noted this in their top 5 reasons) and on average
connection to key Noosa’s access to nature/National parks was rated very highly
environmental (4.5/5, where 5 equals excellent and 4 equates to good). When
assets/areas on holiday, respondents, on average, indicated that evidence of
environmental protection / measures was ‘important’, and
Noosa’s actions in this regard was ‘good’ (4.1/5).
• Potential for higher üü • Other Comments: The visitors survey also indicated that, on
levels of taxes and average, respondents thought that environmental practices such
revenue streams, as waste recycling opportunities, plastic free businesses,
which can be renewable energy usage, water conservation measure and
channelled into encouragement of active transport (such as bike lanes, walking
preservation / areas) were important when they were on holidays. Visitors
conservation / rating of Noosa in these areas were positive - either ‘good’
beautification and (active transport) or marginally below ‘good’ (for all others).
regeneration. Over 90 percent of businesses surveyed indicated that they
recycled, and between 40 to 58 percent practiced the other
environmental measures.
53
Section 61
The Extent of Unintended Negative Consequences of Tourism in Noosa
Noosa, businesses, residents and visitors also indicated that there were unintended negative
consequences associated with tourism. The extent to which these were experienced in
Noosa is summarised below.
Table 17: Summary of Negative Economic Impacts on Noosa associated with Tourism
Potential Economic Evidence of Negative Impacts in Noosa:
Negative Impacts Results from Analyses
• Inflated / high ûû • Business Survey: Over half of the businesses surveyed indicated that
property values their staff had difficulty in securing affordable accommodation.
impacting on locals Comments made included that housing and accommodation was
(and particularly first expensive generally across Noosa, but particularly in coastal areas.
home buyers / low to Due to this, staff often lived outside of Noosa, which has follow on
middle income implications for the need to travel further to work, the requirement
earners) for owning a care. Some businesses specifically mentioned this as a
problem for younger workers. Some businesses also indicated that
affordability was exacerbated because of the generally low wages in
the tourism and service sectors.
• Seasonal No Most businesses agreed that Noosa is very reliant on tourism, which
employment evidence makes the economy susceptible downturns in tourism and to
to seasonality. With regard to seasonality, however, there was no
support evidence to suggest significant employment fluctuations between
negative peak and non-peak periods.
impact
The highest proportion of businesses (52 percent) undertook
renovations every 5 years, and there was no statistical difference
between businesses that were directly or indirectly impacted by
tourism. However, on average a third of businesses that were
directly impacted by tourism undertook renovations every 12
• A casualised ûû months, whereas the same statistic for businesses indirectly
workforce, minimum impacted by tourism was 13 percent. Although this is not conclusive
wages, minimal evidence of an industry maintaining currency of the tourism offer, it
worker benefits and a provides one level of understanding that businesses need to remain
narrow range of skills modern.
development
opportunities • Resident Survey: Between 82 and 84 percent of residents agreed
that, because of Noosa’s appeal, property prices and the cost of
goods and services are likely to be inflated. However, the impact on
the community was rated as relatively small and the impact on the
individual even less.
• A tendency to ûû
depend on tourism • Visitors Survey: Visitors indicated that the quality of the tourism
jobs, which narrows elements in Noosa was generally at least ‘good’ if not higher. The
and makes an only two elements that were rated marginally less than good (but
economy vulnerable were still positive) was evening entertainment and value for money.
Although not conclusive evidence that Noosa is maintaining the
currency of its tourism offer, it does provide evidence that there is
general satisfaction of the tourism offer in Noosa by visitors.
54
Section 62
Potential Economic Evidence of Negative Impacts in Noosa:
Negative Impacts Results from Analyses
• A need to maintain No • Other Comments: The policy environment of Noosa acknowledges
currency of the evidence the important role tourism plays in the economy, but also notes the
tourism offer in order to need for diversification. The Local Economic Development Plan
to maintain support focusses on diversifying the Noosa Economy and, while still including
competitiveness with negative tourism, is also targeting other areas such as health and wellness;
other tourism impact digital economy; rural enterprise; environmental industries;
destinations. education and training; professional services and creative industries.
Transport and affordable housing initiatives are areas of focus for
Council as is sustainable tourism generally.
Table 18: Summary of Negative Social Impacts on Noosa associated with Tourism
Potential Social Evidence of Negative Impacts in Noosa:
Negative Impacts Results from Analyses
• Affordability issues ûû • Business Survey: As noted above, affordability issues associated
with property with property is considered an issue for businesses and their staff.
(particularly for staff For businesses, this in turn leads to longer journeys to work as well
of tourism services), as a reduced ability to encourage active transport. Just over half
leasing and goods the businesses surveyed indicated that tourism and events
and services negatively impacted Noosa through traffic congestion and road
closures. Parking was also seen to be an issue by 42 percent of
• Encroachment of û businesses. Less than 5 percent indicated that tourism made
tourism development Noosa less enjoyable. There were no comments by businesses to
and services over suggest that Noosa is losing its ‘soul’ or identity due to tourism.
local markets
• Resident Survey: Again as noted above, between 82 and 84
percent of residents indicated that tourism contributes to the
erosion of affordable housing and goods and services. However
• Unwelcomed ûû residents rated the impact of the issue on Noosa low, and on them
increased in personally even lower.
population and
congestion The majority of residents cited tourism as a reason for increased
congestion, difficulty with parking and difficulty of locals accessing
public facilities. Survey residents’ perception of the impact on
Noosa resulting from this was relatively high, and somewhat lower
• Potential for û for them personally.
disruption to social
norms, values or Nearly half of the residents surveyed noted that tourism can be
customs associated with people behaving inappropriately, and they rated
this as impactful on Noosa, and less so personally.
• Visitor Survey: Not surprisingly visitors from interstate and
• The No internationally were most likely to use means other than a car to
commercialisation of evidence get to Noosa. As such, they were more likely to think that Noosa
culture and eroding to did not need further car parks.
of ‘soul’ / identity. support
negative The visitor survey focussed on understanding why people came to
impact Noosa and their rating of elements once there. It would be useful
for future surveys to also directly explore any potential negative
impacts / experiences during people’s visits.
55
The text continues on section 63.