Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 46(4), 583–604, July 2003 Visitor Payback: Panacea or Pandora’s Box for Conservation in the UK? ALISTER SCOTT, MIKE CHRISTIE & HELEN TENCH Institute of Rural Sciences, The University of Wales, Aberystwyth SY23 3AL, UK. E-mail: als@aber.ac.uk (Received August 2002; revised December 2002) ABSTRACT This paper assesses the efficacy and relevance of visitor payback as a tool for recreation management in the UK. Visitor payback is essentially a voluntary payment made by visitors towards conservation, differing significantly from the compulsory tourist or bed tax practised in other countries. Attention has recently focused on this technique as a means to supplement the limited funds available for conservation work. However, whilst there are several schemes operating in the UK, there is a dearth of published research that has critically reviewed the concept and operationalization of visitor payback. The research reported here utilizes primary and secondary data to include case studies, semi-structured interviews and focus groups. The findings reveal that visitor payback is a complex concept to evaluate, both in theory and practice, involving a range of benefits and disbenefits. Financial benefits appear less prevalent than the more esoteric ‘feel good’ factor, increased awareness about conservation and partnerships that are evident in payback schemes. Support for visitor payback varies considerably with visitors strongly receptive, whilst the tourism business interests are more cautious. It is concluded that visitor payback needs to be re-conceptualized in more positive terms as a ‘visitor investment scheme’ where conservation takes precedence over financial considerations. Further research is required to try and demystify the tourism business resistance to visitor payback as its potential seems somewhat constrained in the present climate. Introduction The scale and diversity of countryside tourism and recreation has increased dramatically during the last three decades, resulting in increased demands for access to the countryside for an ever increasing range of pursuits (Green, 1981; Valentine, 1991; Scott, 2000). Consequently, environmental impacts are being experienced in areas that attract large numbers of visitors (Environment Com- mittee, 1995). Settings that are freely accessible to the public where entrance charges are neither practical nor acceptable seem particularly susceptible to pressure (Tribe et al., 2000). Ameliorating these impacts is of paramount import- ance to the tourism industry, as the countryside is the principal resource on which the industry is built (English Tourism Council and Countryside Agency, 2001; Wales Tourist Board, 1999, 2000). 0964-0568 Print/1360-0559 Online/03/040583-22  2003 University of Newcastle upon Tyne DOI: 10.1080/0964056032000133170