1. Introduction
It has been argued that tourism and conservation areas have intimately been related for centuries and that driving, walking, or travelling to experience nature-based attractions has continuously been a vital component of the operations of nature-based destinations over the years [
1]. Research carried out in Germany’s Jasmund National Park established that nature-based tourism is among the rapidly-growing segments in contemporary tourism markets [
2], a trend that has been echoed by the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) [
3,
4]. Consequently, given that tourism in conservation areas is heavily dependent on the quality of in-situ cultural and natural resources, the impacts of visitation must be managed carefully, directed, and mitigated wherever possible by all stakeholders for sustainability. It has been observed that the type of management adopted by a tourist destination will mainly depend on the values and objectives it seeks to pursue and that proactive planning of tourism development and visitor management will promise their realisation [
5,
6,
7]. This is because, whereas changes in the resource as a result of visitor use are inevitable, they might be desirable, and therefore, to mitigate these, destination managers are compelled to influence the behaviour of resource users and consequently, the tourism induced impacts [
7]. Visitor management is therefore considered to be part of destination management in protected areas and destinations keen on sustainable tourism; it has never been a function of high visitor numbers, but always been part of any destination or attraction [
8,
9].
Olson et al. [
10], McArthur & Hall [
11], and Van der Donk [
12] define visitor management as the summation of all practices and programs implemented to ensure visitors realise quality experiences while concurrently supporting the realisation of a destination area’s aggregate conservation objectives. This definition evokes three essential elements about visitor management, which is to safeguard and augment the resource, help guests enjoy their visit, and sustain and expand the economic benefits that tourism can bring [
13]. Visitor management initiatives such as site hardening, safety barriers, information centres, provisions of visitor adequate and suitable amenities are envisioned to not only protect the resource from further negative impacts, but also to enhance the quality and diversity of destination experiences. On the other hand, visitor management initiatives like the provision of maps and orientation signage, visitor information, safety and safety and risk management strategies, are thought to enhance a visitor’s experience. Lastly, approaches like tour guiding services will create local jobs and additional visitor experiences for a fee.
Candrea & Ispas [
14] opine that the visitor management techniques available to managers of nature-based destinations include: regulating tourist use by zoning; seasonal pricing to control the type of visitation; differentiated entry or user fees; restricting access to only accredited organisations or individuals to bring visitors to the site; provide nature interpretation programmes and facilities; and lastly, visitor behaviour regulation using codes of conduct. The current study will focus on the last two visitor management techniques, and these are nature interpretation and behaviour regulation. Nature interpretation has been defined as an educational activity that endeavours to reveal meanings and interrelationships through the use of objects, firsthand experiences, or by illustrative media, rather than by merely communicating factual information [
13,
15,
16]. Ham & Sandberg, and Ham et al. [
17] assert that as a visitor management strategy, nature interpretation chooses and delivers messages while appreciating the impact this communication can have on protected areas and its visitors. Nature interpretation constitutes personal forms like tour guiding services and non-personal forms such as codes of conduct, display boards, maps, and orientation signage.
Research carried out in Australia by Eagles et al. [
1] supports the opinion that nature interpretation can be used as a non-obtrusive visitor management strategy. This research appreciates that regardless of the type or form, nature interpretation as a strategy assists visitor management at the site level because “…it represents a link between the resources and the visitors … making areas accessible and delivers insights to visitors about the place [
2], while acknowledging the range of stakeholders involved” [
18]. Further to these, research carried out at Kinabalu Park in Malaysia reveals that there is an increasing demand for guiding services and educational information at interpretation centres [
19,
20,
21,
22]. Positive attitudes amongst both the visitors and interpretative service providers (tour guides and managers) are critical for the success of forms of nature interpretation as a strategy for conservation area visitor management. Given these, nature interpretation should endeavour to create favourable attitudes amongst its users.
In Kenya, research carried out in Mombasa Marine Park and Reserve identified nature interpretation as a tool that can influence the actions or inactions of resource users, and thereby affecting the management of marine resources [
23]. In recognition of the impact nature interpretation can have in visitor management, the Nairobi Safari Walk, for instance, has been appreciated as one of the supreme nature-based tourism and conservation education facility in Kenya with diverse and detailed interpretive services [
24]. Contrary to these, however, other attraction sites and museums have step-on guides that are poorly regulated and mainly provided by freelancers and trainees with little attention given as to their professional skills and competencies [
25,
26,
27]. Further to this, Ikiara & Okech [
28] identified inadequate nature and cultural interpretation of natural tourist attractions as one of the challenges facing the tourism industry in Kenya and that environmental regulations are either disregarded or ineffectively implemented. Indeed, according to Adeola and Aderemi Ayinla [
29], this unfortunate scenario has also been replicated in Nigeria. Edinborough et al. [
19] observe that ad hoc approaches drive the provision of interpretative services considerably in some nature conservation areas. This observation acknowledges that in some conservation areas, interpretative services are unplanned or lack adequate emphasis by the relevant stakeholders.
MMNR is one of Kenya’s well-kept secrets and one of the most famous national reserves in Africa and indeed the world. The rolling savanna grasslands receive regular rainfall that supports a large and diverse selection of herbivores, predators, and birdlife. As a biodiversity hotspot, MMNR is famous for nature-based tourism activities like game drives, balloon safaris, camping, and birding, among others. Globally, there is increased demand for nature-based tourism destinations [
3,
4,
30] like MMNR that receive hundreds of thousands of visitors annually. Thus, the sustainability of natural resources like the MMNR ecosystem that tourism highly depends on requires visitor information, education, and interpretation to better manage the tourists and potential impacts thereof [
12,
26].
Although stakeholders have touted forms of nature interpretation as some of the best non-obtrusive on-site visitor management strategies, unfavourable attitudes pose a challenge to the effectiveness of types of nature interpretation as visitor management strategies. It is especially so amongst its direct users and visitors, tour guides, and relevant visitor managers. The issue becomes more complex as the application of forms of nature interpretation in visitor management is an intricate task that must involve many interests and different stakeholders to address the diverse objectives thereof effectively. Indeed, earlier researchers have identified inadequate interpretation of natural tourist attractions as one of the challenges facing Kenya’s tourism industry [
28]. Visitor management through different forms of nature interpretation in Masai Mara National Reserve (MMNR) is characterised by low coordination and a lack of commitment amongst tourism operators and the County Government of Narok, with each having different visitor management priorities. While the County Government of Narok is keen to sustainably conserve the reserve and sustainable tourism utilisation, tourism operators are interested in customer satisfaction.
The visitor management situation in MMNR is compounded further by the existence of several freelance tour guides providing interpretative services, albeit with wanting competences and minimal regulation. Even though nature interpretation is an effective form of communication in such a scenario, its ability to create favourable visitor attitudes for the realisation of desired visitor management objectives in MMNR is questionable. This study sought to establish the extent to which nature interpretation influences visitors’ attitudes towards the support for conservation, and enhanced visitor experience and satisfaction in MMNR.
5. Discussion and Conclusions
Study results indicate that for the low season period of January to March, MMNR is visited mainly by persons aged below 50 years (88.8%). The respondents were 94.1% of the visitors into the MMNR had college and above level of education. This result echoes the theory that an increased level of education, means that awareness and travel propensity levels will tend to be higher (Meng & Uysal [
78]; Schmid et al. [
80]). As regards the primary purposes of visiting MMNR over two-thirds of the respondents (67%) recognised MMNR as a nature-based tourism destination. Indeed this echoes the appropriateness of the study in space and time as emphasised by UNWTO ([
3,
81]). This could be attributed to the fact that MMNR is a vibrant biodiversity hot spot, which has been voted five years in a row as one of the leading wildlife tourism destinations in Africa and indeed the globe [
81,
82]. On the other hand, the rich biodiversity of wildlife and the interwoven, social-cultural, and economic significance and management challenges at MMNR attracts a significant number of tourists for education and research (33%).
Holiday and nature-based activities, and education and research constitute the two primary purposes of visiting MMNR. A small fraction of tourists visits MMNR for business and work-related reasons. This category of visitors could include conferencing guests retreating to this serene wilderness area, individuals providing outsourced goods and services to the myriad tourism and hospitality facilities in MMNR, just to name but a few. A study finding that could be attributed to the seasonal changes in visitor demographic profiles. The study was carried out between a shoulder season and the start of a low season when tourism products are substantially cheaper in terms of the effort and price tag of getting the services for education and research groups. The statistic for this visitor categorisation could significantly have been different if the study was carried out during the high season when demand and supply forces in the destination skims top cream consumers in the tourist market place [
83,
84]. These results on the purpose of visit notwithstanding, a further 10.8% accounted for those travelling for business and work. Given that the broader MMNR ecosystem has over 7000 total bed nights (C.G.N. [
77]), and thus diversify their product offering to include conferencing guests, a finding that other scholars have endorsed in an attempt to manage the seasonality in nature-based tourism destinations [
83]. This study finding also includes hospitality staff working in tourist facilities in and around the MMNR.
In an attempt to establish the forms of nature interpretation found in MMNR, study findings established that 78.1% of respondents recognised the availability of tour guiding. Although 78.1% was relatively high, it was however expected to be higher, given that a majority of the visitors in the MMNR were in chauffeur-driven tour jeeps. Further to this, tour guiding is among the most popular forms of nature interpretation in nature-based destinations [
84,
85,
86,
87,
88,
89]. The remainder of the respondents (21.9% could be due to two reasons, first, that a small fraction of the respondents were on self-drive tours, and probably some of the respondents did not understand what the forms of nature interpretation are. Relative to other types of nature interpretation, the study explicitly established that there were little visitor codes (do’s and don’ts) in MMNR. These results are indicative of the need for more visitor codes in MMNR and more awareness creation to the general public visiting the MMNR. It is important to note that visitor management through nature interpretation as a strategy will only be successful if diverse forms of nature interpretation are used for complementarity [
7,
16,
34,
43] None of the forms of nature interpretation is a panacea, as endorsed by other scholars [
43,
44,
90].
The results above notwithstanding, a majority (93%) of the respondents gave had positive attitudes towards nature interpretational knowledge possessed by the tour guides in MMNR. This statistic was indeed an overwhelming endorsement of earlier research carried out in a similar nature interpretation ecosystem in the state of Virginia, U.S.A [
74,
84]. However, on the contrary, there was a small fraction who had negative attitudes towards nature interpretational knowledge possessed by tour guides in MMNR. It was indicative that generally, the visitors had positive attitudes towards tour guiding services as a nature interpretation and visitor management strategy in MMNR. It was evident on all the attributes on tour guiding that were being tested and registered high aggregate positive scoring. First, tour guides are knowledgeable at 93%, followed by ‘tour guides are presentable’ with 81%, and lastly, ‘tour guides require specialised training to improve skills’ with an aggregate positive score of 61%. The aggregate negative score or attitudes were low; ‘tour guides are knowledgeable’ at 2%, ‘tour guides are presentable’ with 6%, and lastly, tour guides require specialised training to improve skills with an aggregate positive score of 9%. The visitors generally had positive attitudes towards tour guiding and therefore depicting its critical role in managing sustainable interactions of tourists with attractions and ecosystems like MMNR. This viewpoint has been underscored by similar earlier researches that emphasise the role of nature interpretation in visitor management at destination level with a bias towards tour guiding [
16,
43,
91].
As regards visitor codes, respondents had positive attitudes, that is, they are easy to understand and follow at 89% responses, followed by visitor codes are enforced to enhance compliance at 57% of the responses. Lastly, reserve users observe/follow visitor codes at 53%. However, as positive responses decreased, ambivalence and missing values increased tremendously. It is apparent that, like other similar researches, visitor codes attract negative attitudes more unlike other forms of nature interpretation [
92,
93]. Indeed, as Sharpley [
36], asserts that visitor codes as a destination management strategy are a necessary evil in a sense. That is, in as much as tourists enjoy the liberties and impulsiveness that holiday affords them to an extent, visitor management imposes some restrictions on that freedom. Such a strategy is bound to stir negative attitudes amongst its target audience.
Nevertheless, the visitors in this study opined that, generally, nature interpretation leads to reduced negative visitation impacts (74%), nature interpretation leads to responsible visitor behaviour (67%), and lastly, that nature interpretation positively stirs people towards funding conservation initiatives in MMNR (55%). An observation that was seen to be lower relative to positive responses; some respondents showed ambivalence and uncertainty as to whether nature interpretation positively or negatively affects people’s attitudes towards supporting conservation objectives. 19% for nature interpretation leads to responsible visitor behaviour, and 28% for nature interpretation stirs more funds for conservation.
Results from the qualitative analysis indicated that over 86.6% of the responses were positive, as represented by very positive (50%), and moderately positive (36.6%), with only 13.4% somewhat negative responses. Indeed, according to the farther of nature interpretation Freedman Tilden, it is evident that the chief aim of nature interpretation is not instruction but provocation [
15]. The Elaborative Likelihood Model affirms that the more a persuasive communication makes people think, the better the likelihood of influencing and shaping positive attitudes and behaviour. Nature interpretation serves as a valid form of communication, and what is though-provoking is talk provoking. Thus a positive word of mouth simulates positive thoughts to support conservation and, most importantly, satisfaction.
Qualitative analysis identified seven main themes of the study, that is tour guides, interpretation, nature, education, research, skilled and knowledge. All these themes are critical in an effective nature interpretation strategy at any destination level. Indeed, for vast wildlife destinations like MMNR, the personal touch of tour guides has presented itself as a critical nature interpretation techniques that shape visitor attitudes and thereby their support for conservation and enhanced visitor experience and satisfaction. This result from the qualitative data analysis subordinated other forms of nature interpretation that were either grossly absent or had a lesser impact in creating memorable impressions in the minds of the tourists. It can also be argued that this result is because a majority of tourists in MMNR are always in the company of tour drivers cum guides. These notwithstanding for self-drive tourists, other non-personal forms of nature interpretation like visitor codes, interpretative display boards, orientation signage, and visitor information/education centres play an important role. They should, therefore, never be denounced as less important.
On further scrutiny using inferential statistics, to answer the first research objective and
H02, study results indicated that there was a moderate relationship between attitudes created by nature interpretation and support for conservation. Thus, the research adopted the alternate hypothesis that there is a relationship between attitudes created by nature interpretation and support for conservation. Although, earlier investigations observed that nature interpretation influences visitors attitudes that consequently lead them to support the conservation of attractions [
16,
20,
23,
24,
43], findings of this study have endorsed this notion with some caution. The current research observes that this relationship highly depends on how nature interpretation is implemented. Current study findings have established a moderate correlation between the attitudes created by nature interpretation and the support for conservation as a visitor management strategy. These results suggest that, if nature interpretation were uniformly, consistently, and diligently delivered by all stakeholders, it would have had a higher impact on shaping visitor attitudes and thereby the resultant behaviour and behaviour intentions. On the flip side, it will not have a meaningful effect if the implementation of nature interpretation lacks uniformity, consistency, and commitment by all its stakeholders.
On the second objective and
H02, study results established that there is a moderate relationship between attitudes created by nature interpretation and visitor satisfaction as inferred by spearman correlation. Indeed, further descriptive statistics confirmed these results; 78% of respondents endorsed the statement that nature interpretation reduces visitor complaints in MMNR. An additional 76% acknowledged that nature interpretation could lead to repeat visits, and lastly, 68% affirmed that nature interpretation could lead to increased visitation in MMNR. This finding generally resonates well with other earlier researches that link nature interpretation’s potential to create positive attitudes and consequently enhanced visitor experiences and visitor satisfaction [
32,
42,
45,
83,
94]. Although the current study findings resonate with earlier studies, the present results underscore the strength of this correlation. In the case of MMNR where there exist diverse stakeholders involved in nature interpretation with different visitor management objectives, the moderate relationship exists in an environment that lacks uniformity, consistency, and diligence by all interested parties. These include the management of MMNR as the provider and regulator of nature interpretation, the tourist lodges, tour operators, tour guides as providers and consumers, and lastly, the tourists as the consumers of nature interpretation. In this regard, the current study results suggested that nature interpretation would have had a higher impact on shaping visitor attitudes and thereby enhanced visitor experience and satisfaction if uniformly, consistently, and diligently delivered by all the relevant stakeholders.
This finding presents a complex visitor management scenario and therefore calls for interpreted and coordinated stakeholder efforts and programmes. Whereas the CGN and the management of MMNR might be keen on balancing between conservation and visitor satisfaction by creating a favourable nature interpretation environment, other stakeholders should be involved to share the common vision for the sustainability of the destination area. The focus should not only be on designing and enforcing visitor codes and other interpretative initiatives but also awareness creation programmes and importantly monitoring and evaluation to ensure their effectiveness [
69,
74,
94,
95,
96]. The development and proper sighting of orientation signage and display boards should be accompanied by the provision of adequate road infrastructure, wildlife viewing trails and designated viewing points. This is because it has been observed that inadequate, poor or impassable roads necessitate most off-road or off-trail driving in wildlife destinations [
97,
98,
99]. The development of visitor information centres at designated areas and entry points will go along way to enhance, nature interpretative experiences for those visiting MMNR. Visitor information centres at main entry points will not only provide a sneak preview of what to expect at the destination but also reminding visitors of the code of conduct. Most tourists briefly stop at the entry or exit points as they check-in, check-out or even a little stretch up after long hours in the tour vehicles. The visitor information centres will supplement other existing amenities like cloakrooms, customer care services but also double up as attractions in themselves.
Among other things, study results underscore the role of nature interpretation in visitor management at attraction and level and should always be part of the tourist destination manager’s planning and implementation tool kit. Although the study was carried out in low season when the visitor demographics might be different as well as the travel motives and behaviour, it is imperative to note that nature interpretation is indispensable and never changes. This implies that there might be more monitoring and evaluation, more often repositioning of temporary display boards and orientation signage, and deployment more tour guides and awareness programmes, in the high season compared to a low season. And therefore, the only variable that that might change is the level of resource commitment towards nature interpretation from one season to another.
Therefore, the research concludes that various forms of nature interpretation result in the formation of attitudes that consequently moderately affect the realisation of visitor management objectives in MMNR; that is, support for conservation and visitor satisfaction. Study results attest that nature interpretation, among other phenomena not included in the study, affects the realisation of visitor management objectives. However, unlike other study findings, the current study sought to establish the extent to which nature interpretations shape attitudes towards support for conservation and enhanced visitor experience or satisfaction. Tour guiding created healthier positive attitudes that enhanced visitor experience and visitor satisfaction and could elicit support for conservation. Other non-personal forms of nature interpretation like display boards, visitor codes, and orientation signage created moderate attitudes. These notwithstanding, the non-personal forms of nature interpretation play a complementary role and served as critical infrastructure for individual tourists on self-drive tours. The low season months appears to attract a significant number of youthful tourists.
The study recommends diligent monitoring and evaluation and other continuous improvement initiatives to be instituted to unlock the full potential of nature interpretation as a visitor management strategy. The study further recommends the development of visitor education or information centres that are strategically situated within the expansive MMNR. Interpretational training for tour guides, regular environmental education, and awareness creation on the code of conduct combined with a consistent, well-coordinated, and meticulous implementation of nature interpretation initiatives by all stakeholders in MMNR would sustain a cumulative and long-term impact of this visitor management strategy. This study was carried out during low season months, thus calling for follow-up research to be carried out during the high season months when the MMNR is abuzz with touristic activities; a period when tourist facilities and resources are stretched to the extreme to establish if there is any variance from the current study findings.