Visitor safety on DOC’s Great Walks

This measure relates to indicator 3.2.2 - Opportunities, facilities and services provided meet customer expectations and preferences.

Background

DOC invests heavily in the safety of its visitors through communications and visitor infrastructure. One measure of the performance of these efforts is the extent to which visitors’ perceptions and experiences regarding their own safety and wellbeing met their expectations and were consistent with DOC’s messaging.

79% of respondents agreed ‘a lot’ or ‘totally’ that they felt safe at all times on their Great Walk.

What did we measure?

The Great Walk Guest Survey for 2019/20 comprised an integrated pair of web-based questionnaires that ran for the duration of the each Great Walk’s booking season. The questionnaires included both quantitative and qualitative questions about walkers’ safety perceptions, any safety-related issues and the degree to which they felt responsible for their own safety. Surveys were completed by 2490 visitors.

What did we find?

A total of 79% of respondents agreed ‘a lot’ or ‘totally’ that they felt safe at all times, while a further 14% agreed ‘moderately’ (Table 1). A similar proportion were satisfied with safety information and structures (Table 2).
Walkers generally had low rates of encountering safety-related issues, with the most common issues being injury (8%) and needing more clothing or equipment (10%) (Table 3). While only a small percentage recorded fearing serious injury or death, it is notable that 53 respondents had this concern, which may warrant further investigation. Initial exploration found limited support for breaking down these responses by additional factors such as Great Walk or nationality.
Substantial proportions of respondents from some non-English-speaking countries agreed ‘totally’ that they relied on DOC to keep them safe (Figure 1), despite DOC’s policy on visitor risk management emphasising that visitors are responsible for their own safety and wellbeing and that of others in their care. Since this level of reliance represents a substantial number of Great Walk customers, further research is required to understand this perspective and determine any necessary action.

Tables
Plot

Table 1: General safety.
Agree I felt safe at all times	Count	Percentage
Totally	729	34
A lot	955	45
Moderately	304	14
Slightly	97	5
Not at all	50	2

Table 2: Satisfaction.
With safety information and structures	Count	Percentage
Totally	643	30
A lot	1080	51
Moderately	290	14
Slightly	80	4
Not at all	34	2

Table 3: Safety related events.
Did you or a member of your party/group at any time on the walk	Yes	Percentage
Need better/more clothing or equipment	203	10
Suffer an injury	167	8
Want to abandon the journey before reaching the end	116	5
Suffer from exhaustion	71	3
Suffer from illness	69	3
Fear serious injury or death	53	2
Suffer from dehydration/heat stress	41	2
Become lost or disorientated	15	1
Need to be rescued/evacuated	29	1
Run out of food	26	1
Suffer from hypothermia	10	0

Figure 1: Reliance on DOC safety by nationality.

Data quality

This measure is classified as a partial measure and complies with the data quality guidelines used in the Environmental Reporting framework.

All respondents for the ‘post-visit’ survey were recruited from the population of walkers who provided an email address with their Great Walk on-line booking. They were invited to take the survey immediately after completion of the Great Walk. ‘Pre-visit’ survey respondents were incentivised to also complete the ‘post-visit’ survey. It should be noted that survey respondents did not constitute a random sample of the Great Walk walking population because not all members of the population had an equal opportunity to be selected. All respondents were self-selected. No statistical adjustment was made for these biases.

Additional resources

McGlone, M., Dalley, J., 2015. A framework for Department of Conservation inventory and monitoring: Intermediate outcomes 1-5. Landcare Research Contract Report LC2427 (unpublished) for the Department of Conservation, Wellington.