Oregon sees growth in outdoor industry, worth over $8 billion

New federal data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis found that Oregon’s outdoor industry continued to see growth last year, earning more than $8 billion. Kate Porsche is the director of Oregon State University’s Center for the Outdoor Recreation Economy. Randy Rosenberger is an economics professor in OSU’s department of forestry. They both join us to break down the growth the industry has seen and what its future may look like.

Note: The following transcript was transcribed digitally and validated for accuracy, readability and formatting by an OPB volunteer.

Dave Miller: This is Think Out Loud on OPB. I’m Dave Miller. Oregon’s outdoor recreation industry brought in more than $8 billion last year – that’s according to recent data from the Federal Bureau of Economic Analysis. It also found that a higher percentage of Oregon’s total economic output is tied to outdoor recreation than the national average. I’m joined now by two people who studied this issue from different perspectives. Kate Porsche is the director of Oregon State University’s Center for the Outdoor Recreation Economy. Randy Rosenberger is an economics professor in OSU’s College of Forestry. Welcome to both of you.

Kate Porsche: Thank you.

Randy Rosenberger: Thank you, Dave. Happy to be on.

Miller: It’s great to have both of you. Kate, first – What falls under this broad category of “outdoor recreation,” as far as the feds are concerned?

Porsche: When we’re thinking about outdoor recreation, it’s really interesting. It is broad. We’ve got private sector industry, which includes your retail stores you might go into, services, tour guides, but also our manufacturing partners, public sector organizations – such as community and economic development partners – our Tribal partners, local, state, federal folks. Also the nonprofit sector: community groups, service corps, advocacy. So it is a broad umbrella that we’re talking about.

Miller: And it includes some big ticket items like RVs or boats. That stood out to me, in terms of the pieces of this that represented the biggest chunks of money … that includes RVs and fishing boats, for example.

Porsche: Absolutely, and all those different components of manufactured items that are used out in the outdoor rec space, but definitely marine and RVs are really big ones.

Miller: Randy, how does Oregon compare to other states in terms of the role that outdoor recreation plays in our economy?

Rosenberger: That’s a really good question in the sense that I think those of us that live in Oregon, just look around you and you see this great wealth of outdoor spaces that we get to interact with. And that really sets Oregon apart in being part of the upper tier of those economies that are built off of and enjoy outdoor recreation. We’re only falling behind things like Hawaii, where their industry is tourism. So Oregon’s up there pretty far. And then you look at classic Oregon legislation that happened, like the open access for the beaches along the Pacific coast. That is a unique attribute that Oregon has, that says, “Hey, everybody come enjoy this asset.” And that all contributes to the great economy that we have in Oregon.

Miller: Randy, what did the pandemic mean for this industry?

Rosenberger: It was basically the last nail in the coffin … but at least that was only short-term. To put it in perspective, a lot of people that experienced this, we had things like the September 11 terrorist attacks on the country, and that shut down a lot of air travel and people’s comfort at traveling. The 2008 recession hit them in the pocketbook and gave them less money to spend. And we saw these massive downturns in the economy. Now put those both together, where everything’s closed, nobody’s allowed to go outside, and you’ve got one of the perfect storms for a downturning economy.

There was a loss of about 70% of the total sales associated with the outdoors, in particular hotel, lodging, transportation and food services. These are all things that people spend their money on when they’re enjoying the outdoors, and it was just decimating. The pandemic was really an unforeseen thing that we have not experienced before. Fortunately, it was short lived.

Miller: Kate, some of the big ticket items or the ancillary, more tourism-adjacent pieces of enjoying the outdoors that Randy was talking about there, I can see how that would be a gigantic hit. If people aren’t staying in hotels, for example, or eating in restaurants at the end of, say, a hiking trip, I can see how that would represent a gigantic loss in revenue.

But I remember, even at the height of the pandemic, hearing people at Oregon State Parks or other parks saying more people are going into the woods, more people are thinking about taking up fishing than they could ever remember. So it does seem like, at the same time, there was an increase in interest in certain versions of outdoor recreation. I mean, has that shown up in the data?

Porsche: Randy can speak to that better than me, but I think what we saw anecdotally was, as Randy was saying, this giant pullback. But then this wave, as people then had the opportunity and were desperate to get out of their homes. One of the places they could go, that was safe to go, was the outdoors. And so you saw people beginning to recreate on lakes, on hiking trails. So that rapid comeback, I think Randy can speak a little more to those specific numbers and what that looked like.

Miller: Randy, what kind of an increase did you see in the versions of outdoor activity that were most available to people?

Rosenberger: I think this is a slightly different type of question. If we’re talking about the economy, that’s measured on dollars transactions that are happening. When we’re talking about participation in outdoor recreation, we’re talking about people and the activities that they have. So, yes, the pandemic really had a hit on the economy, but it drove people into alternative activities.

We were desiring, demanding, needing to be outdoors. And what we saw were people shifting to being out on the sidewalks in their neighborhood or the local parks doing things that didn’t cost them any money. So it didn’t show up in the economy as a shift.

What did show up in the economy is RV sales. They were sold out, bicycles were sold out. There [was] that type of demand that we were seeing … but the shift of more people outdoors. And we also had a study that looked at the health benefits associated with physical activity in the outdoors, and that jumped during that time. It’s about 10% of the total Oregon expenditure on medical costs, at about $3 billion a year now. So there are other metrics that we can look at that will tell us what happens to the outdoors and people’s participation. But the economy is all based on people spending money.

Miller: I want to hear more about that and the impact of spending time outside in terms of, for example, people’s health – we can turn that in just a second. But Kate, what do you see as the biggest growth industries right now in terms of outdoor recreation? Or, if localities are turning to you, saying, “hey, what can we do in terms of economic development that’s connected to outdoor recreation,” what do you tell them?

Porsche: Dave, I think it’s interesting because it’s multifaceted. So, of course, as Randy was saying, outdoor recreation is authentic to who we are in Oregon. As an ex-economic developer, I think sometimes the hats that I put on in that space are really thinking about manufacturing, because we do know that manufacturing leads to the trade sector, which is bringing outside dollars into their communities.

So really, how do we support our manufacturing? For example, OSU has our Outdoor Products degree program out in Cascades, creating these programs that are also gonna create more small business opportunities starting up that notion. But then this notion of assisting rural communities, and how do we help guide them through exploring outdoor recreation as a way to diversify their economy and yet still keep the authenticity of these small towns? I will say that Travel Oregon has been an amazing partner in this space. We just recently did two days – one in Bend, talking about maybe diversifying or diluting the activity that’s occurring there. And then one day in Maupin, little, tiny Maupin, helping them talk about how they’re going to stand up and expand that economy.

Miller: When you say diluting the activity, do you mean so it’s not so concentrated, in a way that can feel like it’s taking over the town on some summer day?

Porsche: Yes, exactly. I think Bend has this challenge with really concentrated visitation in the summer. So “diluting” maybe is the wrong word, but like spreading out really, across different seasons, but then also the potential of spreading that out geographically to surrounding areas that really could use that economic activity.

Miller: Randy, we had both of you on because we saw this report about the economic activity, the billions of dollars spent that are tied to this. But one of the things that you do, if I’m not mistaken, is think about different ways to quantify, to think about, the impacts of recreation. What are the other ways you think we should be thinking about spending time outside?

Rosenberger: I think that we have to start thinking about our holistic body and what we’re actually benefiting from when we’re outdoors, both in the physical setting but also mentally. It is a great place to decompress, to de-stress, to think about and get in touch with ourselves. And there’s evidence all over, backed up by medical science, about the health benefits of just having green space around and the quality that it brings to people’s lives.

So those are some of the additional metrics that we’re looking at. When you can measure things with dollars and cents, it gives it a little more “oomph” in the political sphere, that people stand up and pay attention a little bit more. It increases the flow of funding to support and grow the industry.

But we also have to think about, not everybody has to spend money in this area to enjoy these benefits. So just being outside, having access to windows in your office, these are all important things. And we start thinking about it, then it really becomes part of our being, it becomes part of the well-being of the community, of the economy, of each individual. So we’re looking at different ways of measuring this beyond tourism dollars.

That’s why we’re getting into health estimation. We’re looking at community vitality. We’re looking at how recreation can be used to help communities affected by wildfires recover from those wildfires. So there’s a whole bunch, and we’re trying to move recreation from a leisure based activity and a “nice to have,” into a “must have.”  This is really at the center of what it means for us to be human.

Miller: Is there a difference between a complex old-growth forest and a plantation of 30-year-old Doug firs, in terms of their effects on people who are spending time there?

Rossenberger: Yes, there are psychological effects. There have been studies that have been done, that, if you give it a name like an “old-growth forest,” then it gains additional value and benefit to somebody by being exposed to that. So, even though the physical landscapes might be identical, it does matter what it’s called, it does matter who manages it.

This is an interesting difference when you start thinking about the potential impacts of, let’s say, Silver Falls State Park. If that was converted to a national park, all of a sudden you would have a different kind of appeal to a broader audience and it would increase the visitation. But then, like Kate was saying, we have to be cognizant that too much visitation becomes a negative as well. So there’s a difference.

Miller: Kate, we have just about a minute left. One of the newer initiatives in Oregon that we’ve talked about in the past is the Dark Sky places program. What might that mean for the state in terms of everything we’re talking about here?

Porsche: There are a number of initiatives underway, but in Eastern Oregon, there are some communities that have been designated as Dark Sky communities. They have an abundance of darkness at night and that, now, is becoming a marketable product for them in terms of bringing folks to those communities. So, it’s interesting to think about the ways in which these communities can diversify their economies is really coming about, dark skies being just one of them.

Miller: Kate Porsche and Randy Rosenberger, thanks very much.

Porsche: Thank you, Dave.

Rosenberger: Thank you.

Miller: Kate Porsche is the director of the Center for the Outdoor Recreation Economy. Randy Rosenberger is an economics professor in the College of Forestry at OSU.

Contact “Think Out Loud®”

If you’d like to comment on any of the topics in this show or suggest a topic of your own, please get in touch with us on Facebook, send an email to thinkoutloud@opb.org, or you can leave a voicemail for us at 503-293-1983. The call-in phone number during the noon hour is 888-665-5865.