Linking the Economy and Environment of Florida Keys/Florida Bay

June 1999

Vernon R. Leeworthy

Special Projects Office

National Ocean Service

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

U.S. Department of Commerce

and

Patrick Vanasse

The Nature Conservancy

Florida Keys

ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION OF RECREATING

VISITORS TO THE FLORIDA KEYS/KEY WEST:

UPDATES FOR YEARS 1996-97 AND 1997-98

Monroe County Tourist Development Council
Linking the Economy and Environment of Florida Keys/Florida Bay

June 1999

Vernon R. Leeworthy1

and

Patrick Vanasse2

ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION OF RECREATING

VISITORS TO THE FLORIDA KEYS/KEY WEST:

UPDATES FOR YEARS 1996-97 AND 1997-98

1. Vernon R. Leeworthy is an economist with NOAA's National Ocean Service, Special Projects Office in Silver Spring,

MD and is the Project Leader for Linking the Economy and Environment of the Florida Keys/Florida Bay and leads the

Socioeconomic Monitoring Program for the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary.

2. Patrick Vanasse is a student intern hired by the Nature Conservancy under NOAA contract NOAA NC804053. Patrick is

a Masters Degree Candidate in Environmental Studies with a concentration in Integrated Planning and Management of

Coastal Zones at York University, Toronto, Canada.
i

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ii

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .v

List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .v

List of Appendix Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Chapter 1. Visitation Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Number of Person-trips (visits) and Person-days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Concept of a Person-trip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Number of Visitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Number of Person-days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Summary of Person-trips (visits) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Summary of Person-days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Person-trips (visits) and Person-days from 1995 - 1996 to 1997 - 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Person-trips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Person-days . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Chapter 2. Visitor Expenditures and Economic Contribution to the Florida Keys . . . . . . . . . .12

Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Summary of Economic Contribution Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Synopsis of 1995-1996 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

1996-1997 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

1997-1998 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Recreation/Tourism Impact from 1995-1996 to 1997-1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

Visitor Expenditures and Employment Impacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Per Person Per Trip Economic Contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Conclusions and Future Monitoring Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Endnotes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Appendix Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19
iip

ii

Acknowledgments

Many people provided us with information and helped us with administrative tasks necessary in any project.

A very special thank you goes to Paul Dye of The Nature Conservancy, Florida Keys for his continued leadership and support, especially his on-site supervision of student intern and co-author, Patrick Vanasse.

I would also like to thank Ginna Welchel of The Nature Conservancy, Florida Keys for providing critical office

support. We would also like to thank Bridgett Clements in The Nature Conservancy’s headquarters for her

patience and perseverance through the government contracting process.

A very special thank you to Linda MacMinn of the Monroe County Tourist Development Council. As with our

previous efforts, Linda continued in her leadership role in this project. Linda helped coordinate data collection

from various local agencies. She also graciously slaved through the many spreadsheets that are used in the

estimation of visitation and the economic contribution. She also reviewed and provided helpful comments on

our draft report.

We would also like to thank Peter Wiley in the National Ocean Service, Special Projects Office for putting this

document together in his usual professional manner.

Any errors are the sole responsibility of the authors.
iii

Preface

This report has been produced as part of the Socioeconomic Monitoring Program of the Florida Keys National

Marine Sanctuary. It is an effort to update specific baseline socioeconomic estimates presented in the 1995-

1996 study entitled “Linking the Economy and Environment of the Florida Keys/Florida Bay.” The objective of

this report is to update the following priority elements for the years 1996-1997 and 1997-1998: 1) total number

of visitors, 2) total visitor spending in Monroe County, and 3) the resulting secondary economic contribution to

the Monroe County economy in terms of output/sales, income and number of jobs. In addition, this report

presents data on the total Monroe County economy, which has been compiled in order to calculate the

relative contribution to the local economy (e.g. percent of total output/sales, income, and jobs resulting from

visitor recreational activities).

In 1995-1996, NOAA, The Nature Conservancy, Florida Keys Chapter (TNC), and the Monroe County Tourist

Development Council (TDC) formed a partnership and entered into a cooperative agreement to conduct a

study linking the economy and environment of the Florida Keys/Florida Bay. This study was completed and

produced six separate reports. Its objectives were to 1) estimate the market and nonmarket economic values

of recreation/tourism uses of the marine resources of the Florida Keys/Florida Bay ecosystem; 2) provide a

practical demonstration of how market and nonmarket economic values of an ecosystem can be considered

an integral component of the economy of a region when formulating sustainable development objectives and

policies; and 3) foster cooperative management processes.

To achieve the above objectives it was necessary to develop information about the users of marine resources, the way users interact with resources (their recreation activities), the amount and pattern associated

with their uses, and users’ assessment of natural resources, facilities and services. This was accomplished

by designing and implementing a survey of both residents and non-residents (visitors) of Monroe County with

respect to their recreational activities in the Florida Keys/Florida Bay Area, and analysing the data which

yielded the following:

• Estimates of the number of residents and visitors to the Florida Keys and Florida Bay by type of use,

along with estimation of the extent of use by geographic areas (Upper Keys, Middle Keys, Lower Keys,

Key West and access to Florida Bay through Everglades National Park).

• Profiles, developed from survey data, of residents and visitors including age, race/ethnicity, sex, income,

education, place of residence, activity participation and spending in the local and regional economy.

• Estimates of economic contribution (sales/output, income, employment) of both resident and visitor uses

of the Florida Keys and Florida Bay to the Monroe County economy and the South Florida (Broward,

Dade and Monroe Counties) regional economy.

• Estimates of net economic user value of marine resources in the Florida Keys and Florida Bay.

• Importance and satisfaction ratings with respect to natural resources, facilities, and services and an

assessment of the importance of water quality and abundance of diversity of sealife as attractions for

visitors to the area.

The following report builds upon the 1995-1996 surveys. The data presented in this report were derived by

using the methods outlined in “Technical Appendix: Sampling Methodologies and Estimation Methods

Applied to the Florida Keys/Key West Visitor Surveys” (Leeworthy, December 1996). No new surveys were

conducted. The best current information available was combined with information previously gathered during

the 1995-1996 survey to give us updated estimates for the following categories: 1) total number of visitors, 2)

total visitor spending, and 3) total economic contribution to the Monroe County economy for the years defined

as June 1996 - May 1997 and June 1997 - May 1998.

This report is a continued effort to monitor socioeconomic activities within the Florida Keys. As all residents of

this region well know, tourism is an all-pervasive force that has far-reaching impacts. The massive yearly

influx of visitors to the Florida Keys not only impacts the economy but also has serious social, political, and

environmental repercussions that may have to be addressed by the local population and its decision-makers.

The data gathered through this monitoring is essential in providing valuable information on the current state of

tourism in the Florida Keys, and may also be helpful in detecting positive or negative visitation trends to the

area.
vviip

iv

Hence, this report, as well as previous reports in the “Linking the Economy and Environment of the Florida

Keys/Florida Bay” series, are intended for all people involved in planning, managing or providing natural

resources, facilities and services to residents and visitors of the Florida Keys/Key West. Despite the enormous amount of information available in these reports, the databases from which they were generated are

much richer in content. We encourage users to further explore these rich sources of information by making

special requests or obtaining the databases and documentation themselves.

The methods and data used to generate the estimates provided in this report are documented in a separate

technical appendix as in the previous reports in this series. The technical appendix will also contain tables

with a great more detail than provided in this report. The technical appendix for this report will be available

about one month after the release of this report and will be posted on our World Wide Web site.

Other Reports Available

• Visitor Profiles: Florida Keys/Key West

• Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to the Florida Keys/Key West

• Importance and Satisfaction Ratings by Recreating Visitors to the Florida Keys/Key West

• Executive Summary-Visitor Survey

• Technical Appendix: Sampling Methodologies and Estimation Methods Applied to the Florida Keys/Key

West Visitors Surveys

• A Socioeconomic Analysis of the Recreation Activities of Monroe County Residents in the Florida Keys/

Key West

• Executive Summary-Resident Survey

• Technical Appendix: Sampling Methodologies and Estimation Methods Applied to the Survey of Monroe

County Residents

• Nonmarket Economic User Values of the Florida Keys/Key West

• Executive Summary - Nonmarket Economic User Values of the Florida Keys/Key West

• Visitor Profiles: Everglades National Park

World Wide Web

A web site has been established that contains a project background along with all the reports generated in the

project in PDF file format. The site address is

http://www-orca.nos.noaa.gov/projects/econkeys/econkeys.html

The site also provides links to the Monroe County Tourist development council site where information can be

obtained on lodging, restaurants, and recreation facilities and services. There is also a link to the Florida

Keys National Marine Sanctuary site. You can also place orders for any of these reports from this site. In

addition, the site contains the descriptions and links to electronic annotated bibliographic on-line searchable

data bases for South Florida. Separate data bases are available for socioeconomics and ecology.

For further information about this report or the “Linking the Economy and Environment of the Florida Keys/

Florida Bay” project, contact:

Dr. Vernon R. (Bob) Leeworthy

Project Leader

N/SP

1305 East West Highway, SSMC IV, 9th Floor

Silver Spring, MD 20910

Telephone (301) 713-3000 ext. 138

Fax (301) 713-4384

e-mail: Bob.Leeworthy@noaa.gov
v

Table Page

1.1 Number of Person-trips (visits) and Person-days

 by Mode of Access and Season for 1995-1996 ........................................................................ 4

1.2 Number of Person-trips (visits) and Person-days

 by Mode of Access and Season for 1996-1997 ........................................................................ 4

1.3 Number of Person-trips (visits) and Person-days

 by Mode of Access and Season for 1997-1998 ....................................................................... 5

2.1 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to Monroe County for 1996-1997 ........... 14

2.2 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to Monroe County for 1997-1998 ........... 15

2.3 Total Expenditures and Direct Jobs (Wage & Salary) Created

 by Mode of Access and Season for 1996-1997 ...................................................................... 16

2.4 Total Expenditures and Direct Jobs (Wage & Salary) Created

 by Mode of Access and Season for 1997-1998 ...................................................................... 16

2.5 Per Person Per Trip Economic Contribution by Mode of Access: 1997-1998 ................................. 17

List of Tables

List of Figures

Figure Page

1.1 Average Number of Days by Season and Mode of Access.............................................................. 6

1.2 Average Number of Recreating and Non-recreating Daily Visitors

 by Season: 1995-1996, 1996-1997, 1997-1998 ........................................................................ 6

1.3 Person-trips for Recreating Visitors By Mode of Access:

 1995-1996, 1996-1997, 1997-1998 .......................................................................................... 7

1.4 Distribution of Recreating Person-trips (visits) by Mode of Access. ................................................. 8

1.5 Person-trips & Person-days from all Modes of Access: 1995-1996, 1996-1997, 1997-1998 ........... 8

1.6 Distribution of Person-days by Mode of Access ............................................................................... 9

1.7 Average Number of Recreating and Non-recreating Daily Visitors by Season:

 1995-1996, 1996-1997, 1997-1998 ........................................................................................ 10

2.1 Impact Process Due to Visitor Spending in Monroe County: 1996-1997 ....................................... 13

2.2 Impact Process Due to Visitor Spending in Monroe County: 1997-1998 ....................................... 14

2.3 Annual Visitor Expenditures and Reported Gross Sales for Monroe County ................................. 15
vvipi

vi

List of Appendix Tables

Appendix Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

Table A.1 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors

 to Monroe County: June - November 1996 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

Table A.2 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors

 to Monroe County: Dec. 1996 - May 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

Table A.3 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors

 to Monroe County: June - June - November 1997 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

Table A.4 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors

 to Monroe County: Dec. 1997 - May 1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
1

million person-days in the Florida

Keys/Key West. 69.4 percent

came by auto, 9 percent by air,

and 21.7 percent by cruise ship.

June 1997 - May 1998: 2.92

million recreating visitors spent

14.3 million person-days in the

Florida Keys/Key West. 73.7

percent came by auto, 8.3 percent

by air, and 18 percent by cruise

ship.

Economic Contribution

1995-1996 recreating visitor

spending information (adjusted for

inflation), was combined with

current 1996-1997 and 1997-1998

visitation estimates in order to

estimate total visitor spending in

Monroe County. These results

were then used to estimate

tourism impacts on the Monroe

County economy. The results are

summarized here.

1996-1997: For the period June

1996 - May 1997, 2.65 million

recreating visitors spent about

$1.24 billion in Monroe County,

which had a total impact of $1.39

billion in output/sales, $507.88

million in income, and a little over

17 thousand full and part-time

jobs. Recreation/tourism accounted for about 59 percent of

output/sales, 44 percent of income, and approximately 34

percent of employment in Monroe

County.

1997-1998: For the period June

1995 - May 1996, 2.92 million

recreating visitors spent about

$1.38 billion in Monroe County,

which had a total impact of $1.55

billion in output/sales, $565.29

million in income, and almost 19

thousand full and part-time jobs.

Recreation/tourism accounted for

over 65 percent of output/sales, 47

percent of income, and over 36

percent of employment in Monroe

County.

 Executive Summary

This report has been produced as

part of the Socioeconomic Monitoring Program of the Florida Keys

National Marine Sanctuary. It is

an effort to update specific

baseline socioeconomic estimates

presented in the 1995-1996 study

entitled “Linking the Economy and

Environment of the Florida Keys/

Florida Bay”. The objectives of

this study are 1) to update visitation estimates, and 2) to establish

contributions made by tourism to

Monroe County’s economy, for the

years defined as June 1996-May

1997 and June 1997-May 1998.

Visitation

June - November 1996: 1.16

million recreating visitors spent 4.7

million person-days in the Florida

Keys/Key West. 79.3 percent

came by auto, 7.2 percent by air

(Key West and Marathon airports),

and 13.5 percent by cruise ship

(Key West).

December 1996 - May 1997: 1.49

million recreating visitors spent 8.6

million person-days in the Florida

Keys/Key West. 69.3 percent

came by auto, 9.1 percent by air,

and 21.5 percent by cruise ship.

June 1996 - May 1997: 2.65

million recreating visitors spent

13.3 million person-days in the

Florida Keys/Key West. 73.7

percent came by auto, 8.3 percent

by air, and 18 percent by cruise

ship (Key West).

June - November 1997: 1.45

million recreating visitors spent 5.8

million person-days in the Florida

Keys/Key West. 80 percent came

by auto, 6 percent by air (Key

West and Marathon airports), and

14 percent by cruise ship (Key

West).

December 1997 - May 1998: 1.47

million recreating visitors spent 8.5
2p

2

This page intentionally left blank.
3

it to count a visitor each time he/

she visited the Florida Keys. This

is the concept of a person-trip or

visit. We can use these two terms

interchangeably.

Number of Visitors. The number

of person-trips (visits) and the

number of visitors are two distinct

measurements that have long

been a source of confusion. For

the two measurements to be

equivalent requires that, for the

given time period of estimation,

each person only makes one visit

(trip). Although this is true for the

vast majority of visitors, it is not

true of all visitors. The 1995-1996

survey demonstrated that visitors

sampled during the summer made

on average 5.12 trips annually,

while visitors surveyed during the

winter period made an average of

2.42 trips annually. Therefore,

dividing the total number of

person- trips by the average

number of visits yields an estimate

of the separate number of visitors

in a given period. For the purpose

of this study, an estimate for the

number of different visitors is not

needed. However, an estimate for

the number of person-trips (visits)

to the Florida Keys is of value

when discussing socioeconomic

impacts to the region. This estimate makes it possible to extrapolate per person trip expenditures

to total expenditures for a given

period. Please note that the terms

“person-trips” and “visits” are

synonymous and will be used

interchangeably throughout this

report.

Number of Person-days. Another

useful measurement is the number

of person-days. Each visit (trip)

may vary in length. For day-trips,

the concept of a person-day and

person-trip are thus equivalent.

But many trips (visits) are for more

than one day. According to the

1995-1996 survey, the average

length of stay in the Florida Keys/

Key West was 4.2 days per visit

and 6.35 days per visit, for the

July-August 1995 and JanuaryApril 1996 sampling periods,

respectively. Multiplying the

average length of stay by the total

number of person-trips (visits)

yields an estimate of the total

number of person-days for any

given period. Conversely, dividing

the estimate of the total number of

person-days by the total number

of days in the time period yields an

estimate for the average number

of visitors in the Florida Keys/Key

West on the average day during

that time period. This latter

estimate could be used in assessing the “functional population,” i.e.,

the number of people in the

Florida Keys/Key West on a given

day. The concept of a functional

population is used in planning for

facilities and services in the

Florida Keys/Key West, and for

hurricane evacuation.

Summary: Person-trips (visits).

Tables 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3 summarize the estimates of person-trips

for the years 1995-1996, 1996-

1997, and 1997-1998. The 1995-

1996 table, developed prior to this

report, was included in order to

illustrate the changes in persontrips since monitoring efforts

began in 1995. Person-trip estimates are distinguished according

to type of visitor (e.g. recreating,

non-recreating, and all), season,

and mode of access.

June-November 1996. About

1.16 million person-trips (visits)

were made by recreating visitors

across all three modes of access

to the Florida Keys/Key West.

About 79.3 percent came by auto,

7.2 percent by air, and 13.5

percent by cruise ship. An additional 223 thousand person-trips

(visits) were made by non-recreating visitors for a total of about 1.38

million person-trips (visits) by all

visitors.

 Chapter 1.

Visitation Estimates

The first step in estimating economic contribution of recreating

visitors is the estimation of the

number of visitors. In this chapter,

the measurements estimated are

first defined then summaries are

provided of each of the estimated

visitation estimates. Comparisons

are made across seasons, mode

of access, and year. A technical

appendix details how all the

estimates were produced. See

Leeworthy and Vanasse 1999.

Number of Person-trips

(visits) and Person-days

The sampling design used in the

1995-1996 Auto, Air, and Cruise

Ship Survey made it possible to

estimate the number of persontrips to the Florida Keys made by

non-residents of Monroe County

by season and mode of travel

(access) to the area. By using

information from the 1995-1996

survey and current figures with

regards to traffic counts, air

enplanements and cruise ship

landings within Monroe County it

is possible to derive updated

visitation estimates for the region.

The measurement “person-trips”

must be differentiated from the

number of visitors and the number

of visitor days or “person-days.”

Concept of Person-trip. For any

given day, the number of persontrips and the number of visitors are

the same. However, once the time

period for estimation is expanded

beyond one day, then the possibility exists that the same person can

make more than one trip (visit).

The 1995-1996 survey was

designed to interview visitors as

they were leaving the Florida Keys

(ending their visit), which allowed
4p

4

 Table 1.1 Number of Person-trips (visits) and Person-days by Mode of Access and Season for 1995 -1996

Mode of Access Person-trips Person-days Person-trips Person-days Person-trips Person-days

1. Auto 4,172,355 984,046 1,013,656 6,913,134 1,997,702 11,085,489 

2. Air 79,524 608,359 141,950 1,283,228 221,474 1,891,587 

 a) Key West 543,380 71,030 124,246 1,123,184 195,276 1,666,563 

 b) Marathon 64,979 8,494 17,704 160,044 26,198 225,023 

3. Cruise Ship 108,434 108,434 212,878 212,878 321,313 321,312 

Total 4,889,148 1,172,004 1,368,484 8,409,240 2,540,489 13,298,388 

Ave.# of Visitors 45,952 26,717 36,334 

1. Auto 922,234 217,508 294,162 2,006,185 511,670 2,928,419 

2. Air 1,946 14,887 3,477 31,432 5,423 46,319 

 a) Key West 10,978 1,435 2,976 26,903 4,411 37,881 

 b) Marathon 511 3,909 501 4,529 1,012 8,438 

3. Cruise Ship - - - - - - 

Total 937,121 219,454 297,639 2,037,617 517,093 2,974,738 

Ave.# of Visitors 11,135 5,121 8,128 

1. Auto 5,094,589 1,201,554 1,307,818 8,919,319 2,509,372 14,013,908 

2. Air 81,470 623,246 145,427 1,314,660 226,897 1,937,906 

 a) Key West 554,357 72,465 127,222 1,150,087 199,687 1,704,444 

 b) Marathon 68,888 9,005 18,205 164,573 27,210 233,461 

3. Cruise Ship 108,434 108,434 212,878 212,878 321,312 321,312 

Total 5,826,268 1,391,458 1,666,123 10,446,857 3,057,581 16,273,125 

Ave.# of Visitors 57,087 31,838 44,462 

June - November 1995 Dec.1995 - May 1996 Annual Total

Recreating Visitors

Non-recreating Visitors

All Visitors

Table 1.2 Number of Person-trips (visits) and Person-days by Mode of Access and Season for 1996 -1997

Mode of Access Person-trips Person-days Person-trips Person-days Person-trips Person-days

1. Auto 3,903,034 920,527 1,029,829 7,023,434 1,950,356 10,926,468 

2. Air 83,608 639,601 135,516 1,225,065 219,124 1,864,666 

 a) Key West 580,474 75,879 117,170 1,059,217 193,049 1,639,691 

 b) Marathon 59,127 7,729 18,346 165,848 26,075 224,975 

3. Cruise Ship 156,262 156,262 319,904 319,904 476,166 476,166 

Total 4,698,898 1,160,397 1,485,249 8,568,402 2,645,646 13,267,300 

Ave.# of Visitors 47,079 25,677 36,349 

1. Auto 936,667 220,912 314,793 2,146,888 535,705 3,083,555 

2. Air 1,998 15,285 3,325 30,058 5,323 45,343 

 a) Key West 11,727 1,533 2,806 25,366 4,339 37,094 

 b) Marathon 465 3,557 519 4,692 984 8,249 

3. Cruise Ship - - - - - - 

Total 951,952 222,910 318,118 2,176,946 541,028 3,128,898 

Ave.# of Visitors 11,961 5,202 8,572 

1. Auto 4,839,701 1,141,439 1,344,622 9,170,322 2,486,061 14,010,023 

2. Air 85,606 654,886 138,841 1,255,123 224,447 1,910,009 

 a) Key West 592,202 77,412 119,976 1,084,583 197,388 1,676,785 

 b) Marathon 674,684 88,194 18,865 170,540 27,059 845,224 

3. Cruise Ship 156,262 156,262 319,904 319,904 476,166 476,166 

Total 5,650,849 1,383,307 1,803,367 10,745,349 3,186,674 16,396,198 

Ave.# of Visitors 59,040 30,879 44,921 

June - November 1996 Dec.1996 - May 1997 Annual Total

Recreating Visitors

Non-recreating Visitors

All Visitors
5

December ‘96– May ’97. About

1.49 million person-trips (visits)

were made by recreating visitors

across all three modes of access

to the Florida Keys/Key West.

About 69.3 percent came by auto,

9.1 percent by air, and 21.5

percent by cruise ship. An additional 318 thousand person-trips

(visits) were made by non-recreating visitors for a total of about 1.8

million person-trips (visits) by all

visitors.

June ‘96 – May ’97. About 2.65

million person-trips (visits) were

made by recreating visitors across

all three modes of access to the

Florida Keys/Key West. About

73.7 percent came by auto, 8.3

percent by air, and 18 percent by

cruise ship. An additional 541

thousand person-trips (visits) were

made by non-recreating visitors for

a total of about 3.2 million persontrips (visits) by all visitors.

June-November 1997. About

1.45 million person-trips (visits)

were made by recreating visitors

across all three modes of access

to the Florida Keys/Key West.

About 80 percent came by auto, 6

percent by air, and 14 percent by

cruise ship. An additional 285

thousand person-trips (visits) were

made by non-recreating visitors for

a total of about 1.74 million

person-trips (visits) by all visitors.

December ‘97 – May ’98. About

1.47 million person-trips (visits)

were made by recreating visitors

across all three modes of access

to the Florida Keys/Key West.

About 69.4 percent came by auto,

9 percent by air, and 21.7 percent

by cruise ship. An additional 323

thousand person-trips (visits) were

made by non-recreating visitors for

a total of about 1.8 million persontrips (visits) by all visitors.

June ‘97 – May ’98. About 2.92

million person-trips (visits) were

made by recreating visitors across

all three modes of access to the

Florida Keys/Key West. About

73.7 percent came by auto, 8.3

percent by air, and 18 percent by

cruise ship. Non-recreating

visitors made an additional 609

thousand person-trips (visits) for a

total of about 3.5 million persontrips (visits) by all visitors.

Summary: Person-days. The

concept of person-trips (visits) is

important for several purposes in

the study. However, person-trips

(visit) are not of constant length.

The person-trip (visits) measurement does not tell us much about

the relative congestion in the

Florida Keys/Key West during

different seasons. As Tables 1.1,

1.2, and 1.3 demonstrate, there is

relatively little differences between

the number of person-trips (visits)

for June-November (summer) and

Table 1.3 Number of Person-trips (visits) and Person-days by Mode of Access and Season for 1997 -1998

Mode of Access Person-trips Person-days Person-trips Person-days Person-trips Person-days

1. Auto 4,917,811 1,159,861 1,021,441 6,966,228 2,181,302 11,884,038 

2. Air 86,758 663,699 130,949 1,183,779 217,707 1,847,478 

 a) Key West 605,161 79,106 117,482 1,062,037 196,588 1,667,198 

 b) Marathon 58,538 7,652 13,467 121,742 21,119 180,279 

3. Cruise Ship 203,967 203,967 319,518 319,518 523,485 523,485 

Total 5,785,476 1,450,586 1,471,908 8,469,525 2,922,494 14,255,001 

Ave.# of Visitors 46,536 31,615 39,055 

1. Auto 1,201,243 283,312 320,109 2,183,143 603,421 3,384,386 

2. Air 2,058 15,744 3,195 28,883 5,253 44,627 

 a) Key West 12,225 1,598 2,314 20,919 3,912 33,143 

 b) Marathon 460 3,519 381 3,444 841 6,963 

3. Cruise Ship - - - - - - 

Total 1,216,987 285,370 323,304 2,212,026 608,674 3,429,013 

Ave.# of Visitors 12,154 6,650 9,395 

1. Auto 6,119,054 1,443,173 1,341,550 9,149,371 2,784,723 15,268,425 

2. Air 88,816 679,442 134,144 1,212,662 222,960 1,892,104 

 a) Key West 617,386 80,704 119,796 1,082,956 200,500 1,700,341 

 b) Marathon 62,057 8,112 13,848 125,186 21,960 187,243 

3. Cruise Ship 203,967 203,967 319,518 319,518 523,485 523,485 

Total 7,002,463 1,735,956 1,795,212 10,681,551 3,531,168 17,684,014 

Ave.# of Visitors 58,690 38,265 48,449 

Recreating Visitors

Non-recreating Visitors

All Visitors

June - November 1997 Dec.1997 - May 1998 Annual Total
6p

6

December-May (winter) seasons.

But anyone familiar with the

Florida Keys would readily attest

to the fact that, on average, it is

much busier during the winter

season than the summer season.

Person-days is the appropriate

measure to reflect the total

demand placed on facilities and

services by visitors to the Florida

Keys/Key West. Person-days can

be estimated for each season with

measures obtained on the average length of stay for visitors by

mode of access and season.

Estimates of the average length of

stay (measured in number of

days) are summarized in Figure

1.1. These estimates were taken

from the 1996 “Visitor Profiles:

Florida Keys/Key West” report

(Leeworthy and Wiley, 1996).

They were derived from Auto, Air

and Cruise ship on-site samples,

and represent length-of-stay

estimates for recreating visitors

only. Since non-recreating visitors

were not interviewed, it was

assumed that non-recreating

visitors have the same average

length of stay as recreating

visitors. Since the probability of

engaging in recreation activity is

related to the length of stay, the

estimates for non-recreating

visitors will most likely be overstated or biased upwards. The

upward bias can be accounted for

by developing a range of estimates based on reducing the

average length of stay for nonrecreating visitors by 50 percent.

Figure 1.1 Average Number of Days by Season and Mode of Access 

4.24 

6.82 7.65 

9.04 

1 1 

0 

2 

4 

6 

8 

10 

June - Nov. Dec.-May 

Auto Air Cruise Ship 

Number of Days per Visit

Figure 1.2 

Average Number of Recreating and Non-recreating Daily Visitors by Season: 

1995-1996; 1996-1997, 1997-1998

25,677

47,079

31,615

45,952

11,135

5,121 5,202

11,961

6,650

12,154

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

June-Nov.

1995

Dec. '95-May

'96

Jun-Nov.

1996

Dec. '96-May

'97

June-Nov.

1997

Dec. '97-May

'98

Resident Population Recreating Visitors Non-recreating Visitors

81,186

81,186

80,585

80,585

80,000 80,000

26,717

46,536

Visitors

111,838

137,087

111,464

139,625

119,451

139,876
7

The estimate using the assumption that non-recreating visitors, on

average, stay about half the

number of days of recreating

visitors will called a lower bound

estimate.

Person-days are derived by

multiplying the estimate of persontrips (visits) by the average length

of stay. During the June-November 1996 season, it was estimated

that there was between 4.7 and

5.7 million person-days of visitation in the Florida Keys. This

translates into between 25.7 and

30.9 thousand visitors in the Keys

on an average day (see Figure

1.2). With a resident population of

about 80.6 thousand, an average

“functional population” is estimated to be between 106.3 and

111.5 thousand people. This is an

estimate of the number of people

requiring facilities and services in

the Florida Keys/Key West on an

average (not peak) day during this

time period. This means that the

ratio between tourists and residents was approximately 1:(2.6 to

3.1) (one tourist for every 2.6 to

3.1 residents).

For the December 1996 – May

1997 season, between 8.6 and

10.7 million person-days of

visitation were estimated. This

translates into between 47.1 and

59 thousand visitors in the Florida

Keys/Key West on an average day

during this season. Again, with a

resident population of approximately 80.6 thousand, an average

of between 127.7 and 139.6

thousand people per day is

estimated during this period.

(Tourist/resident ratio: 1:(1.4 to

1.7)).

During the June-November 1997

season, it was estimated that

there were between 5.8 and 7

million person-days of visitation in

the Florida Keys. This translates

into between 31.6 and 38.3

thousand visitors in the Keys on

an average day (see Figure 1.2).

With a resident population of

about 81.2 thousand, an average

“functional population” is estimated to be between 112.8 and

119.8 thousand people. This is an

estimate of the number of people

requiring facilities and services in

the Florida Keys/Key West on an

average (not peak) day during this

time period. (Tourist/resident ratio:

1:(2.1 to 2.6)).

For the December 1997– May

1998 season, between 8.5 and

10.7 million person-days of

visitation were estimated. This

translates into between 46.5 and

58.7 thousand visitors in the

Florida Keys/Key West on an

average day during this season.

Again, with a resident population

of approximately 81.2 thousand,

an average of between 127.7 and

139.9 thousand people per day is

estimated during this period.

(Tourist/resident ratio: 1:(1.4 to

1.7)).

Person-trips (visits) and

Person-days from 1995-

1996 to 1997-1998

Person-trips. For the year 1995-

1996, approximately 2.54 million

person-trips (visits) were made by

recreating visitors across all three

modes of access to the Florida

Keys/Key West. For the year

1996-1997, that figure increased

by 4 percent to 2.65 million. The

year 1997-1998 saw a further 9.5

percent increase in person-trips,

making the annual visitation by

From 1995-1996 to 1997-1998 visits to the Florida Keys have

increased by 15 percent.

Figure 1.3 Person-trips for Recreating Visitors By Mode of Access:

1995-1996, 1996-1997, 1997-1998

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

Auto Air Cruise Ship All Modes

1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998

1,997,702

1,950,356

2,181,302

221,474

219,124

217,707

321,313

476,166

523,485

2,540,489

2,645,646

2,922,494

Person-trips
8p

8

recreating visitors 2.92 million (see

Figure 1.3). Since the first year of

monitoring, person-trips (visits) to

the Florida Keys/Key West have

therefore increased by approximately 15 percent. The person-trip

totals for all visitors (recreating

and non-recreating), over that

same period, have followed

roughly the same pattern of

increase.

Interestingly, even though 1996-

1997 and 1997-1998 saw overall

increases in total person-trips,

individual seasons have experienced slight decreases at different

times. For example, the December

– May season experienced a

slight decrease, while the JuneNovember season of 1997-1998

demonstrated a significant increase in person-trips over the

previous year. Although these

seasonal variations over time are

to be expected, continued monitoring will enable us to determine if

rebounded the following year, and

person-trips by cruise ship visitors

have continued to increase. From

1995-1996 to 1997-1998, the

annual proportion of person-trips

made by air visitors decreased

from 9 to 7 percent, the proportion

of auto person-trips also decreased from 78 to 75 percent,

while person-trips from cruise ship

visitors increased from 13 to 18

percent (see Figure 1.4).

This may be of importance since

air visitors stay longer per visit

than auto and cruise ship visitors

in all seasons (see Figure 1.1). In

addition, the following section will

demonstrate that air visitors also

1995-1996

1996-1997

1997-1998

Person-trips: All Modes

Person-days: All Modes

13,298,388

13,267,300 14,255,001

2,540,489

2,645,646

2,922,494

Figure 1.5 Person-trips & Person-days from all Modes of Access: 

1995-1996, 1996-1997, 1997-1998

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

16,000,000

trends are developing. In this

particular case, we may see an

indication that the summer season

is attracting a greater proportion of

annual person-trips. This phenomenon would then lead us to believe

that the usual summer season

trough in tourism to the Florida

Keys may be lessening.

A closer look at person-trips over

time, also demonstrates that the

distribution of person-trips may be

changing. As can be seen in

Figure 1.3, person-trips by air

have experienced a continued

decrease since 1995-1996,

person-trips from auto visitors

dropped slightly in 1996-1997 but

Auto

78%

Air

9%

Cruise 

Ship

13%

Auto

75%

Air

7%

Cruise 

Ship

18%

Figure 1.4 Distribution of Recreating Person-trips (visits) by Mode of Access

1995-1996 1997-1998
9

spend more per visit than other

visitors.

Person-days. As mentioned

previously, person-trip data can

help us gauge visitation estimates

to the Florida Keys/Key West.

However, person-day estimates

are better indicators of the relative

congestion within an area, and are

therefore extremely useful when

examining social and economic

impacts from visitation over time.

A closer look at person-days for

1996-1997 illustrates this point.

Over the course of that year, the

Florida Keys experienced an

increase in person-trips, but

person-days actually declined

slightly within that same period

(see Figure 1.5). This decline is

due to changes in the composition

of visitors to the Florida Keys. In

1996-1997, total person-trips

increased from the previous year.

However, auto and air person-trips

experienced a slight decrease,

which was more than offset by an

increase in person-trips (visits)

from cruise ship visitors (see

Figure 1.3). These minor changes

in visitor distribution, actually

caused total annual person-days

to decline, since cruise ship

visitors have much shorter stays

than other auto or air visitors. It is

therefore important to note that

slight changes in the distribution of

person-trips can have a considerable impact on annual person-day

totals.

The person-day data also helps

reveal the relative impacts from

the three visitor groups. For

example, someone solely looking

at person-trip figures might

overestimate the economic impact

of cruise ship visitors. In 1997-

1998 cruise ship visitors accounted for 18 percent of all

person-trips but only accounted for

4 percent of total person-days

(see Figure 1.6).

Annually, the average daily

number of visitors in the Florida

Keys has continued to increase

over the three-year study period

(see Tables 1.1, 1.2, and 1.3). In

1995-1996, the number of visitors

in the Florida Keys on a given day

was about 44 thousand, the next

year that figure increased to 45

thousand, and in 1997-1998 there

were 48 thousand visitors in the

Florida Keys on an average day.

However, when looking at these

figures by season, we observe

year to year fluctuations (see

Figure 1.7). This data also clearly

shows that the average daily

number of visitors in the Keys is

much higher in the winter season

than the summer season. In 1995-

1996, the average number of

visitors was 44 percent higher

during the average winter season

day. In 1996-1997, that figure

went up to 47 percent and then

dropped to 34 percent for 1997-

1998. Over time these figures may

help us determine if concerted

efforts to promote summer visitation are yielding positive results.

Figure 1.6 Distribution of Person-days by Mode of Access

Auto

84%

Cruise 

Ship

2%

Air

14%

Auto

83%

Air

13%

Cruise 

Ship

4%

1995-1996 1997-1998
10101010p

10

Although the first section has presented estimates for both recreating and non-recreating visitors, the

remainder of this report focuses solely on recreating visitors. Non-recreating visitors were not

interviewed in the 1995-1996 survey; consequently, there are no expenditure estimates available for that

group.

5,121

11,135

5,202

11,961

6,650

12,154

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

Visitors

June-Nov.

1995

Dec. '95-

May '96

Jun-Nov.

1996

Dec. '96-

May '97

June-Nov.

1997

Dec. '97-

May '98

Figure 1.7 Average Number of Recreating and Non-recreating Daily Visitors by 

Season: 1995-1996, 1996-1997, 1997-1998

Recreating Visitors Non-recreating Visitors

26,717

45,952

25,677

47,079 31,615

46,536

The average daily number of visitors in the Keys is much higher in the winter season than the summer

season. In 1995-1996, the average number of visitors was 44 percent higher during the average winter

season day. In 1996-1997 that figure rose to 47 percent and then dropped to 34 percent in 1997-1998
11

This page intentionally left blank.
12121212p

12

purchased. This happens because

the businesses serving tourists

must increase the amount of labor,

goods, and services they buy in

order to produce the additional

goods and services. Thus, the

businesses that have experienced

increased tourist spending will

have a ripple effect on the other

businesses that supply them, and

those businesses, in turn, affect

others on down the supply chain.

Economists call the initial spending activity the “direct effect,” and

the subsequent ripples are the

“indirect” and “induced” effects.

The indirect and induced effects

are also called the multiplier

impacts. See the box on the next

page for detailed definitions of

these and related terms.

Since we were not able to correctly calibrate the microcomputer

IMPLAN input-output model for

Monroe County, we used an

alternative method that does not

allow for the separate estimation

of the indirect and induced effects

nor does the method used allow

for the estimation of value added.

The methods used here are

explained in English et al, 1996

and in Leeworthy 1996.

Summary of Economic

Contribution Results

Synopsis of 1995-1996 Results

For the period June 1995 - May

1996, 2.54 million recreating

visitors spent about $1.2 billion in

Monroe County. This had a total

impact of $1.33 billion in output/

sales, $506 million in income, and

created almost 22 thousand full

and part-time jobs. Recreation/

tourism accounted for over 60

percent of output/sales, 45 percent of income, and over 46

percent of employment in Monroe

County.

1996-1997 Results. Figure 2.1

summarizes the estimated eco-

 Chapter 2.

Visitor Expenditures

and Economic Contribution to the Florida

Keys

In 1995-1996, an expenditure

mailback survey gathered detailed

information on 47 spending

categories. Information was also

gathered on total trip expenditures, the amount spent in South

Florida (Dade, Broward, and

Monroe Counties), and the

amount spent in the Florida Keys/

Key West (Monroe County).

Estimates were made for spending

in Monroe County on a per person

per day basis. Estimates were

also made on a per person trip

basis for the total trip, the amount

spent in South Florida, and the

amount spent in Monroe County.

Combining per person per trip

expenditure estimates with

visitation (person-trips) estimates

made it possible to estimate total

expenditure which was then used

to evaluate the economic contribution of visitors to South Florida and

the Florida Keys/Key West. More

detailed information about the

mailback survey and the resulting

information is available in “Visitor

Profiles: Florida Keys/Key West”

(Leeworthy and Wiley, 1996) and

“Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to the Florida Keys/

Key West” (English et al, 1996).

The objective, for this section of

the report, is much narrower in

scope than the 1995-1996 study,

consisting solely of updating 1)

total visitor spending in Monroe

County, and 2) the resulting

secondary economic contribution

to the Monroe County economy in

terms of output/sales, income and

number of jobs. The objective is

not to update all the information

gathered in the previous survey.

Therefore, this study does not

necessitate an extensive survey

like the one utilized 1995-1996.

The information gathered in the

1995-1996 provides valuable

information concerning visitorspending patterns, which is used

in conjunction with up-to-date

secondary data in order to yield

the desired estimates for 1996-

1997 and 1997-1998. While

visitor-spending patterns may

change over time, it is assumed

that in the short-run these figures

undergo only minor changes;

therefore visitor spending figures

gathered in 1995-1996 are the

most appropriate and cost effective data available.

This section focuses on total

visitor spending in Monroe County

and the resulting economic

contribution made to the economy.

Several tables in the technical

appendix (see Leeworthy and

Vanasse, 1999) provide detailed

information about the spending

patterns for different visitors.

However, it must be noted that the

figures in the detailed expenditure

tables were taken from the 1995-

1996 survey and were simply

adjusted to take inflation into

account1 . These tables are

essential in calculating total

expenditure figures used in the

assessment of visitor economic

impact, but they are of little value

when trying to evaluate changes in

visitor spending across specific

categories. As a result, this

section will not take a detailed look

at visitor spending (according to

demographics, spending categories, geographic area, and season) as was done previously,

because the results would essentially be the same as the ones for

1995-1996.

Definitions

When a local economy experiences an increase in spending by

visitors, residents of that economy

benefit by more than just the dollar

amount of the goods and services
13

• Direct Effects: The purchase amount of new inputs needed to manufacture or

produce the final goods and services purchased by visitors.

• Indirect Effects: The value of the inputs used by firms that are called upon to

produce additional goods and services for those firms effected directly by

recreational spending.

• Induced Effects: Results from the direct and indirect effects of recreation

spending. Induced effects are related to persons and businesses that receive

added income as a result of local spending by employees and managers of

firms and plants that are effected by the direct and indirect effects of

recreation spending. This added income results in increased demand for

goods and services and, in turn, increased production and sales of inputs.

• Total Effects: The sum of direct, indirect, and induced effects (Walsh et al.

1987). Typically, the total effects are between 1.5 to 2 times more than the

amount that visitors originally spent in the local economy.

• Total Output: The value of all goods and services produced by the industries

in a sector. For an economy as a whole, total output double-counts the value

of production because it accounts for all sales; intermediate outputs are

counted every time they are sold. In terms of direct impacts, the additional

total output caused by visitor expenditures is equal to the increased final

demand, and the increased final demand will roughly equal the dollar value of

visitor expenditures, minus the value of items that have to be imported into

the region.

• Value Added: Total output minus the value of inputs to a sectors’ production.

As such, value added is the net benefit to an economy, and it contains the sum

of employee compensation, indirect business taxes, and property income.

• Total Income: The sum of property income and employee compensation.

• Employment: The number of full-time and part-time employees. Summer

and Winter totals are averaged to get annual totals.

Figure 2.1 Impact Process Due to Visitor 

Spending in Monroe County: 1996-1997

Visitor Spending

$1.24 Billion

Leakage

$369.26 Million

Direct Income

$317.42 Million

Direct Employment

10,668 Jobs

Direct Output

$870.74 Million

Multiplier Process

Total Income

$507.88 Million

Total Employment

17,069 Jobs

Total Output

$1.39 Billion

nomic contribution of recreating

visitors to the Florida Keys/Key

West. From June 1996 to May

1997, visitors spent an estimated

$1.24 billion in Monroe County. Of

these expenditures $369.26

million, or roughly 30 percent,

were spent to purchase inputs

outside of Monroe County. An

example of this may be telephone

service. When a merchant sends a

check outside the county to pay

his phone bill, only a portion of this

money remains in the county to

support operations. Due to “leakage”, the direct impact on the local

economy is therefore less than the

total initial spending.

The direct effects are the amount

of the increased purchase of

inputs used to manufacture or

produce the final goods and

services purchased by visitors. In

the case of Monroe County, this

translated to $870.74 million in

direct output (sales), $317.42

million in direct income, and

10,688 jobs in direct employment.

As mentioned previously, businesses that have experienced

increased tourist spending will

cause a ripple effect on the other

businesses that supply them. This

is represented in Figure 2.1 by the

multiplier effect, which yields the

total effects shown at the bottom

of the figure. The total estimated

output is $1.39 billion, estimated

income is $507.88 million, and the

estimated total employment is

17,069 jobs.

For these numbers to be meaningful, we must be able to compare

them to the Monroe County

baseline economy. Table 2.1

shows the official reported output

(sales), income and employment

for 1996-1997 in Monroe County.

The official reported output for the

survey period was about $2.38

billion. The estimated total tourist

contribution was $1.39 billion, or

about 59 percent. The total

estimated tourist contribution to
14141414p

14

Table 2.1 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to Monroe County for 1996-1997

Estimated Tourist Contribution

Reported

County Totals* Direct Total % of Economy

Output $ 870,743,510 2,379,443,786 $ 1,393,189,617 $ 58.55%

Income $ 317,424,717 1,150,711,000 $ 507,879,547 $ 44.14%

Employment 10,668 49,944 17,069 34.18%

* Source (Output): Florida Department of Revenue.

* Source (Income and Employment): Regional Economic Information System, Bureau of Economic 

Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce

Figure 2.2 Impact Process Due to Visitor 

Spending in Monroe County: 1997-1998

Visitor Spending

$1.38 Billion

Leakage

$412.02 Million

Direct Income

$353.31 Million

Direct Employment

11,808 Jobs

Direct Output

$967.98 Million

Multiplier Process

Total Income

$565.29 Million

Total Employment

18,892 Jobs

Total Output

$1.55 Billion

income, $507.88 million, was

approximately 44 percent of the

official reported income of $1.15

billion. The official reported

employment was 49,994 jobs. The

estimated total tourist contribution

to employment was 17,069 jobs,

or about 34 percent. As we can

see, tourist contribution to the

economy of Monroe County is

very significant. For details by

season, see Appendix Tables A.1

and A.2.

1997-1998 Results. Figure 2.2

summarizes the estimated economic contribution of recreating

visitors to the Florida Keys/Key

West for the year 1997-1998.

From June 1997 to May 1998,

visitors spent an estimated $1.38

billion in Monroe County. Of these

expenditures $412.02 million, or

roughly 30 percent, was spent to

purchase inputs outside of Monroe

County. The amount that remained in the Monroe County

economy translated to $967.98

million in direct output (sales),

$353.31 million in direct income,

and 11,808 jobs in direct employment. Once the multiplier effect is

accounted for, the total estimated

output is $1.55 billion, estimated

income is $565.29 million, and the

estimated total employment is

18,892 jobs.

Again, we must compare these

numbers to the Monroe County

baseline economy in order for

them to be meaningful. Table 2.2

shows the official reported output

(sales), income, and employment

for 1997-1998. The official reported output for the survey period

was approximately $2.36 billion.

The estimated total tourist contribution was about $1.55 billion, or

about 66 percent. The total

estimated tourist contribution to

income, $565.29 million, was

about 47 percent of the official

reported income of $1.2 billion.

The official reported employment

was 51,571 jobs. The estimated

total tourist contribution to employment was 18,892 jobs, or about 37

percent. For details by season,

see Appendix Tables A.3 and A.4.

Recreation/Tourism Impact from 1995-1996 to

1997-1998

Over the last 3 years, visitor

spending in the Florida Keys

continued to increase at roughly

the same pace as the rest of the

local economy. Visitor expenditure

was an estimated $1.19 billion in

1995-1996, $ 1.24 billion in 1996-

1997, and about $1.38 billion in

1997-1998.
15

Table 2.2 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to Monroe County for 1997-1998

Estimated Tourist Contribution

Reported

County Totals* Direct Total % of Economy

Output $ 967,976,311 2,355,312,881 $ 1,548,762,097 $ 65.76%

Income $ 353,307,147 1,200,279,500 $ 565,291,435 $ 47.10%

Employment 11,808 51,571 18,892 36.63%

* Source (Output): Florida Department of Revenue.

* Source (Income and Employment): Regional Economic Information System, Bureau of Economic 

Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce

1995-1996

1996-1997

1997-1998

Visitor Expenditure

Monroe County Reported Gross Sales

2,203,305,357

2,379,443,786

2,355,312,881

1,190,820,952 1,243,919,301 1,382,823,301

-

500,000,000

1,000,000,000

1,500,000,000

2,000,000,000

2,500,000,000

Figure 2.3 Annual Visitor Expenditures and Reported Gross Sales for Monroe County

The impact of tourism sector on

the Monroe County economy has

remained relatively constant within

that same period. The total output/

sales resulting from tourism was

an estimated 60.53 percent in

1995-1996, 58.55 percent 1996-

1997, and 65.76 percent for 1997-

1998. The proportion of income

that can be accredited to tourism

also underwent little change –

45.03 percent in 1995-1996, 44.14

percent the following year, and

47.10 in 1997-1998.

Employment resulting from

tourism, is where we see the

greatest amount of change. In

1995-1996, visitor spending

created approximately 21,848

jobs, or 46.49 percent of Monroe

County employment. In 1996-

1997, that figure dropped to

17,069 jobs or 34.18 percent, and

later rose to 18,892 or 36.63 in

1997-1998. However it must be

noted that the drop from 1995-

1996 to 1996-1997 can be partly

attributed to a change in the way

the BEA classifies the different

types of employment, and the way

this study calculates annual

employment.2 When we recalculated the 1995-1996 employment

by averaging the summer and

winter employment, as was done

for 1996-1997 and 1997-1998, we

get a 1995-1996 employment

estimate of 18,620 which was 39.6

percent of Monroe County employment.

Visitor Expenditures and Employment Impacts

As mentioned previously, this

section only focuses on total

visitor spending estimates. Visitation estimates for 1996-1997 and

1997-1998 were combined with

the 1995-1996 expenditure

estimates (adjusted for inflation)

and yielded the figures presented

in the following tables.

 Tables 2.3 and 2.4 display the

relative economic impact of Auto,

Air , and Cruise Ship visitors for

1996-1997 and 1997-1998 by

displaying their respective spending in the local economy and the

number of direct wage and salary

jobs they create. It should be

noted that the employment figures
16161616p

16

 Annual Total

Mode of Access

Auto 

Expenditures $ 561,295,146 401,019,478 $ 962,314,623 $ 77.36%

 8,283 7,049 77.66% 5,814

Air

Expenditures $ 142,043,520 93,203,151 $ 235,246,671 $ 18.91%

1,365 2,083 1,724 18.99%

Cruise Ships

Expenditures $ 33,369,100 12,988,907 $ 46,358,007 $ 3.73%

166 443 304 3.35%

Total Expenditure: All Modes $ 1,243,919,301

Total Direct Jobs: All Modes 9,077

Table 2.3 Total Expenditures and Direct Jobs (Wage & Salary) Created by Mode of Access and Season for 

1996-1997

% of Total Across 

All Modes

June- November 1996 Dec.'96 - May '97

Direct Jobs 

(Wage & Salary)

 Direct Jobs 

(Wage & Salary)

 Direct Jobs 

(Wage & Salary)

 Annual Total

Mode of Access

Auto 

Expenditures $ 572,597,639 518,595,188 $ 1,091,192,826 $ 78.91%

7,519 8,450 7,985 79.20%

Air

Expenditures $ 141,034,566 99,206,573 $ 240,241,139 $ 17.37%

1,453 2,069 1,761 17.46%

Cruise Ships

Expenditures $ 34,062,071 17,327,265 $ 51,389,336 $ 3.72%

221 452 336 3.34%

Total Expenditure: All Modes $ 1,382,823,301

Total Direct Jobs: All Modes 10,082

 Direct Jobs 

(Wage & Salary)

 Direct Jobs 

(Wage & Salary)

 Direct Jobs 

(Wage & Salary)

Table 2.4 Total Expenditures and Direct Jobs (Wage & Salary) Created by Mode of Access and Season for 

1997-1998

June- November 1997 Dec.'97 - May '98 % of Total Across 

All Modes

only state direct jobs created, and

do not take into account either

proprietors’ employment or the

employment from the multiplier

process. As can be seen from the

tables, the impact of auto visitors

far exceeds that of air and cruise

ship visitors. For the two years

presented above, auto visitors

were responsible for about 77 to

79 percent of total visitor spending

and employment. Air visitors

accounted for approximately 17 to

19 percent of expenditure and

labor impacts, and cruise ships

visitors had the smallest economic

impact by contributing to between

3 and 4 percent of total expenditures and direct jobs created.

Per Person Per Trip Economic Contribution

At the aggregate level, auto

visitors clearly have a greater

economic impact than air and

cruise ship visitors do. However,

Table 2.5 offers further insights

into the relative economic importance between air, auto and cruise

ship visitors. Table 2.5 displays

per person per trip expenditures

and the employment impacts that

the respective visitors have within

the Florida Keys/Key West for

1997-1998. These data can be of

value when making decisions

regarding such things as, tourism

promotion and infrastructure

investment.

On an individual basis, air visitors

contribute significantly more to the

Monroe economy than any other

visitors. In 1997-1998, it is estimated that individual air visitors,

on average, spent $1,103.51
17

For further details about

expenditures and economic

impacts, please consult the

Appendix.

during their visit to Monroe

County. Auto visitors averaged

about $500 in expenditures, while

cruise ships visitors contributed an

estimated $98 per person per trip.

Since direct job figures are derived

from expenditure data, we can

also see that individual air visitors

have a significantly greater

employment impact than either

auto or cruise ship visitors.

Conclusions and Future Monitoring Efforts

The tourism industry continues to

grow in the Florida Keys/Key West

and the tourism industry’s relative

contribution to the local Monroe

County economy has remained

constant. Most of the growth,

however, has been in cruise ship

visitors and, since these visitors

never get outside of Key West, the

growth has not been evenly

distributed throughout the Florida

Keys. Given that only a small

percentage of cruise ship visitors

participate in activities that involve

direct use of the area’s natural

resources, analysis of this trend

from a political-economic perspective suggests that this trend is a

movement away from sustainable

natural resource-based tourism.

Cruise ship visitors do bring

dollars into the local economy and

do provide tax dollars to local

government. This will in turn

develop a business-political

constituency that may not support

public and private investments that

would support sustainable natural

resource-based tourism, since

their customers do not directly

depend on quality natural resources to a significant extent for

their visits. Also, given that the

cruise ship based economy is

concentrated in Key West, it may

further drive a wedge between

Key West business and government and other areas of the

Florida Keys further fueling the

trend towards incorporation

throughout the Florida Keys.

Ecological monitoring information

from the Florida Keys National

Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) is now

available for only one year, but

initial information all seems

positive, and given the growth in

the tourist economy, it would

appear that the economy and

environment of the Florida Keys/

Key West are both improving. The

monitoring programs for the

FKNMS (both the ecological and

socioeconomic) are still in their

early stages (especially the

socioeconomic). These programs

provide the basic information for

all stakeholders to judge the

benefits of public and private

investments in environmental

protection and restoration that are

fundamental to sustaining the

environment and economy of

Monroe County.

Endnotes

1

 For the lodging category, the

inflation rate was not used. Data

for the average price per room in

Monroe County were available

from the Tourist Development

Council. The adjustment for this

category was made accordingly.

2

 For employment data after 1994,

BEA classification changes

attribute a greater proportion of

total employment to the category

“other” and a lesser proportion of

total employment to the category

“proprietors”. This affects the total

income to wages and salaries ratio

which in turn affects the derivation

of total employment impacts for

Monroe County . For 1995-1996,

total employment was equal to the

largest number among summer

and winter employment. For 1996-

1997 and 1997-1998, total employment was derived by averaging summer and winter employment..

Table 2.5 Per Person Per Trip Economic Contribution by Mode of Access: 1997-1998

Mode of Access

Air

Expenditures $ 1,077.02 1,143.49 $ 1,103.51 $ 

Direct Jobs (Wage 

& Salary) 0.0167 0.0157 0.0160

Auto 

Expenditures $ 560.58 447.12 $ 500.25 $ 

Direct Jobs (Wage 

& Salary) 0.0065 0.0083 0.0073

Cruise Ships

Expenditures $ 106.60 84.99 $ 98.17 $ 

Direct Jobs (Wage 0.0011 0.0014 0.0013

& Salary)

 June- November 1997 Dec.'97 - May '98 Weighted Annual 

Average
18181818p

18

References

English, Donald B.K., Kriesel,

Warren A., Leeworthy, Vernon

R. and Wiley, Peter C. 1996.

Economic Contribution of

Recreating Visitors to the

Florida Keys/Key West. Athens,

GA: USDA Forest Service,

Southern Research Station,

Outdoor Recreation and Wilderness Assessment Group;

Athens, GA: University of

Georgia, Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics;

and Silver Spring, MD: National

Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, Strategic Environmental Assessments Division. 22 pp.

Leeworthy, Vernon R. 1996.

Technical Appendix: Sampling

Methodologies and Estimation

Methods Applied to the Florida

Keys/Key West Visitor Surveys.

Silver Spring, MD: National

Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, Strategic Environmental Assessments Division. 170 pp.

Leeworthy, Vernon R. and Wiley,

Peter C. 1996a. Visitor Profiles: Florida Keys/Key West.

Silver Spring, MD: National

Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, Strategic Environmental Assessments Division. 159 pp.

Leeworthy, Vernon R. and Wiley,

Peter C. 1996b. Importance

and Satisfaction Ratings by

Recreating Visitors to the

Florida Keys/Key West. Silver

Spring, MD: National Oceanic

and Atmospheric Administration,

Strategic Environmental Assessments Division. 23 pp.

Leeworthy, Vernon R. and

Vanasse, Patrick. 1999. Technical Appendix: Economic

Contribution of Recreating

Visitors to the Florida Keys/Key

West, Updates for 1996-97 and

1997-98. Silver Spring, MD:

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Special

Projects Office.
19

Appendix
20202020p

20

Table A.1 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to Monroe County: June - November 1996

Direct Total % of Economy

Output 355,048,075 1,055,127,589 568,076,920 53.84%

Income 128,601,203 470,059,341 205,761,926 43.77%

Employment 40,454 8,634 13,814 34.15%

* Source (Output): Florida Department of Revenue

Estimated Tourist Contribution

 Reported County 

Totals*

* Source (income and Employment): Regional Economic Information System, Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce

Table A.2 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to Monroe County: Dec. 1996 - May 1997

Direct Total % of Economy

Output 515,695,436 1,324,316,197 825,112,697 62.30%

Income 188,823,513 590,982,866 302,117,621 51.12%

Employment 59,434 12,702 20,323 34.19%

* Source (Output): Florida Department of Revenue

Estimated Tourist Contribution

 Reported County 

Totals*

* Source (income and Employment): Regional Economic Information System, Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce

Table A.3 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to Monroe County: June - November 1997

Direct Total % of Economy

Output 444,590,318 1,154,541,561 711,344,509 61.61%

Income 161,220,389 543,659,741 257,952,622 47.45%

Employment 47,033 10,768 17,229 36.63%

* Source (Output): Florida Department of Revenue

Estimated Tourist Contribution

 Reported County 

Totals*

* Source (income and Employment): Regional Economic Information System, Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce

Table A.4 Estimated Economic Contribution of Recreating Visitors to Monroe County: Dec. 1997 - May 1998

Direct Total % of Economy

Output 523,385,993 1,200,771,320 837,417,588 69.74%

Income 192,086,758 565,397,259 307,338,814 54.36%

Employment 56,109 12,847 20,555 36.63%

* Source (Output): Florida Department of Revenue

Estimated Tourist Contribution

 Reported County 

Totals*

* Source (income and Employment): Regional Economic Information System, Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S. Department of Commerce