Nature Interpretation and Visitor Management Objectives: A Survey of Tourist Attitudes at Maasai Mara National Reserve, Kenya

Abstract

Nature interpretation has been advocated as a soft and non-obtrusive on-site visitor management strategy to enhance visitor knowledge and understanding of the resource, mitigate visitor impacts, encourage the conservation and improvement of attraction areas, and assist visitors in enjoying their visit. However, the way in which nature interpretation programs are implemented, and the subsequent attitudes created amongst visitors can pose a challenge to the effectiveness of nature interpretation as a visitor management strategy. The situation becomes more complicated with limited resources to implement, monitor, and evaluate nature interpretation in expansive wilderness areas like Masai Mara National Reserve (MMNR). The question therefore is, does nature interpretation in MMNR create favourable attitudes amongst wildlife tourists, consequently leading to enhanced visitor experiences and satisfaction of the support for conservations, or not? This research, therefore, sought to establish the extent to which the attitudes created by nature interpretation affect visitor satisfaction or the enhanced visitor experience and support for conservation, broadly termed as visitor management objectives in MMNR Kenya. Thus, Ho1 postulated that attitudes created by nature interpretation do not influence visitors’ support for conservation in MMNR, and Ho2, that attitudes created by nature interpretation do not enhance visitor experience and satisfaction in MMNR. This study used a structured questionnaire for the survey to collect data from a sample of 351 respondents as a proportion of visitors into MMNR. Research findings revealed that a moderate relationship between attitudes created by nature interpretation and support to conservation with rs = 0.426 and p = 0.000, thus null hypothesis H01 was rejected. Secondly, results showed that attitudes created by nature interpretation moderately affected visitor satisfaction rs = 0.478 and p = 0.000, while similarly, null hypothesis H02 was rejected. The research concluded that various forms of NI result in the formation of attitudes that moderately affect support for conservation and visitor satisfaction. The study concluded that enhanced nature interpretation training and awareness creation, along with continual improvement initiatives, could unlock its full potential as a visitor management strategy. This consistent, well-coordinated, and diligent implementation of nature interpretation initiatives by all stakeholders in MMNR would sustain a cumulative, long-term impact.

Full text

sustainability
Article
Nature Interpretation and Visitor Management
Objectives: A Survey of Tourist Attitudes at
Maasai Mara National Reserve, Kenya
Leanard Otwori Juma 1, Izabella Mária Bakos 2and Aniko Khademi-Vidra 2,*
1Institute of Tourism and Hospitality Management, Dedan Kimathi University of Technology,
Nyeri 10143, Kenya; leanard.juma@dkut.ac.ke
2Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, Szent István University, 2100 Gödöll˝o, Hungary;
bakos.izabella.maria@gtk.szie.hu
*Correspondence: Khademi.Vidra.Aniko@gtk.szie.hu
Received: 29 July 2020; Accepted: 2 September 2020; Published: 4 September 2020


Abstract:
Nature interpretation has been advocated as a soft and non-obtrusive on-site visitor
management strategy to enhance visitor knowledge and understanding of the resource, mitigate visitor
impacts, encourage the conservation and improvement of attraction areas, and assist visitors in
enjoying their visit. However, the way in which nature interpretation programs are implemented,
and the subsequent attitudes created amongst visitors can pose a challenge to the effectiveness of
nature interpretation as a visitor management strategy. The situation becomes more complicated
with limited resources to implement, monitor, and evaluate nature interpretation in expansive
wilderness areas like Masai Mara National Reserve (MMNR). The question therefore is, does nature
interpretation in MMNR create favourable attitudes amongst wildlife tourists, consequently leading
to enhanced visitor experiences and satisfaction of the support for conservations, or not? This research,
therefore, sought to establish the extent to which the attitudes created by nature interpretation affect
visitor satisfaction or the enhanced visitor experience and support for conservation, broadly termed
as visitor management objectives in MMNR Kenya. Thus, H
o
1 postulated that attitudes created
by nature interpretation do not influence visitors’ support for conservation in MMNR, and H
o
2,
that attitudes created by nature interpretation do not enhance visitor experience and satisfaction in
MMNR. This study used a structured questionnaire for the survey to collect data from a sample of
351 respondents as a proportion of visitors into MMNR. Research findings revealed that a moderate
relationship between attitudes created by nature interpretation and support to conservation with
rs =0.426
and p=0.000, thus null hypothesis
H01
was rejected. Secondly, results showed that attitudes
created by nature interpretation moderately affected visitor satisfaction rs =0.478 and p=0.000,
while similarly, null hypothesis
H02
was rejected. The research concluded that various forms of
NI result in the formation of attitudes that moderately affect support for conservation and visitor
satisfaction. The study concluded that enhanced nature interpretation training and awareness creation,
along with continual improvement initiatives, could unlock its full potential as a visitor management
strategy. This consistent, well-coordinated, and diligent implementation of nature interpretation
initiatives by all stakeholders in MMNR would sustain a cumulative, long-term impact.
Keywords:
nature interpretation; visitor codes; orientation signage; tour guiding; visitor management;
Maasai Mara
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
Sustainability 2020,12, 7246; doi:10.3390/su12187246 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 2 of 24
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
–
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
–
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.

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 3 of 24
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
–
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.
2. Literature Review
2.1. The Call for Visitor Management and the Place of Nature Interpretation
Over the years, the United Nations World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) has reported and
projected sustained and steady tourism growth globally [
3
,
4
,
30
]. This tourism growth trend has
indeed been replicated and reported in most regions, destinations, or tourist market segments

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 4 of 24
around the world. For instance, contemporaries in Germany have observed that nature-based
tourism is among the fastest-growing market segments [
2
]. Similarly, Eagles et al. [
1
], Frost, Laing,
and Beeton [
31
],
Chen and Prebensen [32]
, in their researches on tourism and conservation areas in
East Asia, observed that the global travel in the contemporaries marketplace is growing. Besides,
they continue to add that journeys are not only swelling, but also that holiday travel to nature-based
destinations like parks, reserves, and similar conservation areas are also tremendously increasing.
In this regard, therefore, as visitor numbers grow, so do the management challenges thereof.
It could be argued that, in most cases, visitors are unaware of the fact that this type of behaviour
might be impacting negatively on the environment. Actions including casual damage to sensitive
areas; exploring areas of fragile biodiversity; littering; feeding wild animals; moving too close to wild
animals (harassment); removal of souvenir pieces; making noise; vandalising vegetation and graffiti
on-site have significant impacts on the environment [
6
,
14
,
32
–
38
]. Unpleasant tourists’ behaviour
may be attributed partly to a lack of visitor management and information provision. In this regard,
therefore, it calls for careful management of visitor experiences that must minimise harmful impacts at
attractions, while at the same time maximising enjoyment, understanding, and appreciation of the
resource through satisfactory and suitable access, and nature interpretation.
On the other hand, Sharpley [
35
,
39
,
40
] asserts that visitor management is a necessary evil in a
sense. That is, inasmuch as tourists enjoy the liberties and impulsiveness that holiday affords them to
an extent, visitor management imposes some restrictions on that freedom. In essence, some of these
restrictions are seen as essential for the sustainability of destination resources upon which tourism
depends, but may also preserve visitor safety and welfare, albeit appearing to curtail visitor freedom
on the face value. In this regard, visitor management becomes necessary to mitigate the potential
negative impacts of tourism activities, while at the same time enhancing visitor comfort and safety by
minimising potential hazards and risks to visitors. Nevertheless, ideally, visitor management should
be unobtrusive, non-regulatory, and able to heighten visitor experiences.
On a similar note, Bhati & Pearce [
41
] and Kuo [
42
] observe that hard visitor management strategies
are primarily suitable for short-term results in visitor negative impacts management. However,
hard visitor management strategies applied alone might not realise long-term outcomes because
they have obstructive aspects. Scholars support the opinion that conservation education or nature
interpretation as a soft visitor management strategy ought to be applied to compliment hard management
strategies [
13
,
41
,
43
–
45
]. These researchers, as endorsed by other earlier scholars, observe that nature
interpretation elaborates the reasons behind regulatory actions like zone closures or limiting the
number of visitors is necessary and, indeed, the implications of inappropriate behaviour [1,19]
According to Bhati and Pearce [
41
], Alazaizeh and Hallo [
43
], and Durao and Joao Carneiro [
45
],
they relentlessly endorse nature interpretation as a visitor management technique that assists with
site management; it represents a link between the resources and the visitors. Likewise, Albrecht [
13
]
and Sterry [
27
] assert that nature interpretation is a necessary and practical component of a tourism
planner’s tool kit. In essence, a well-designed focused and presented nature interpretation has a critical
role in enhancing visitor experiences and satisfaction, mitigating visitor impacts, and encouraging
positive behaviour towards nature conservation.
Indeed, conservation education and nature interpretation are fundamental tools used by
managers in attraction and destination areas to regulate visitors to attractions in a non-intrusive
or non-obstructive manner better, thereby reducing negative impacts while increasing the positive
effects
[13,32,34,38–40,46]
. Furthermore, nature interpretation raises general awareness that will lead to
support for resource management policies and agencies. On a similar note, Mason [
47
], Alazaizeh and
Hallo [
43
], and Bhati & Pearce [
41
], all affirm that diligent application of nature interpretation programs
significantly enhances the visitor experiences, thus making the attraction area more competitive.
Indeed, nature interpretation is not the same as information provision. Whereas the later provides
facts about phenomena, the former, on the other hand, endeavours to reveal concepts, meanings,
and the interrelationships that exist within the wonders of mother nature. In this regard, therefore,

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 5 of 24
nature interpretation educates the visitor about his new environment and enhances the experience
thereof [
19
,
48
]. The guided tours provided to visitors, nature interpretation information contained on
display boards, visitor codes, and orientation signage not only enhance the understanding that tourists
get at the destination but also healthier interactions and satisfaction.
Nevertheless, the values and attitudes of visitors are changing; they now demand more
environmentally responsive services and products, as well as information [
25
]. Indeed, these sentiments
have been echoed by Durao and Joao [
45
] and Juma [
16
], observe that visitors want to learn about
the environment they visit and also want to understand the connections with a broader ecosystem.
Nature interpretation can be a treasured tool to intensify conservation awareness and appreciation
amongst tourists and site-level tourism operators, depending on these nature conservation areas.
Nature interpretation also illustrates how tourists and site-level tourism operators can support the
conservation and sustainability of natural and cultural resources upon which they may depend for
non-consumptive utilisation today and into the future.
Studies by Farrell and Marion [
49
] identify minimising visitor impacts, evaluation, and public
involvement and shared learning as some of the objectives in visitor management through nature
interpretation. More inclusively, Raasch [
2
] supports the argument that various forms of nature
interpretation have a variety of goals and benefits for conservation, as well as to visitor enjoyment.
In other words, different kinds of nature interpretation enhance visitor knowledge and understanding
(educational activity), improve visitor experiences (recreational activity), and support conservation.
Nonetheless, nature interpretation is not always successful. Scholars have identified some
of the reasons why nature interpretation may not realise its full potential as a tool for visitor
management [
41
,
44
,
45
]. However, the full potential can only be realised after understanding how
to use nature interpretation as a tool. Other challenges can present themselves as impediments
to achieving these potentials. These include a lack of creativity in the implementation of nature
interpretation, lack of an evaluation culture, and limited training on destination visitor management
objectives [
50
]. In light of increasingly higher numbers of visitations UNWTO [
3
], Albrecht [
13
],
Bhati and Pearce [41]
, Hovardas et al. [
18
], Donk and Cottrell [
51
], Sterry [
27
] and Van der Donk [
12
]
stress that education, interpretation, and information are vital tools used by administrators to manage
visitors better. For instance, in Kenya, nature-based tourism, also referred to as wildlife tourism, is the
largest segment and accounts for over 90% of nature-based tourism and nearly 75% of aggregate tourism
earnings [
16
,
52
,
53
]. In conclusion, the literature reviewed indicates that nature interpretation, as a
visitor management strategy, enhances visitor knowledge and understanding, supports conservation,
and enhances visitor experiences. Hence, the current research considered the latter two elements as key
indicators (herein referred to as visitor management objectives) of visitor management through nature
interpretation in the Masai Mara National Reserve. Generally, nature interpretation is a communication
strategy that simplifies how visitors interacts with the spatial areas visited. Indeed, scholars describe
nature interpretation as an educational activity, a communication process, or a management tool [
17
]),
to practice stimulating and encouraging appreciation [19].
On the other hand, Tilden [
15
], as cited in Raasch [
2
] and Carranza et al. [
35
], Juma [
16
], notes that
nature interpretation is an educational activity that aims to reveal meaning and interrelationships
through the use of real objects, firsthand experiences or by illustrative media, rather than communicating
factual information. Tilden [
15
] continues to assert that interpretation provokes curiosity and interest.
It relates to everyday experiences of visitors, reveals a memorable message, and addresses the whole
story using a unifying theme [
7
,
14
,
16
,
20
,
36
,
44
–
46
,
54
]. Ceballos-Lascur
á
in [
55
], Edinborough et al. [
19
],
Hansen & Fowler [
56
], and Borges & Ronda [
57
] assert that not having a nature interpretation program
in a conservation area is akin to inviting guests into your abode and then vanishing. In this regard,
the role of various forms of nature interpretation is first to make visitors more conscious of the
spaces and places they visit [
16
,
26
,
45
]. Secondly, nature interpretation provides information to guests
that increase their understanding and consequently stimulating interest, that will result in grander
enjoyment and possibly responsible behaviour amongst visitors within the visited site [
10
,
13
,
14
,
18
,
55
].

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 6 of 24
Ham and Sandberg [17]
assert that, when nature interpretation successfully provokes individuals to
have independent thinking and to attach separate meanings about an object or place, it helps in shaping
that person’s experience with an entity or site if these thoughts are pleasing or gratifying, thereby
enhancing a person’s experience.
Undeniably, regardless of the type or form, nature interpretation as a visitor management technique
assists in site management as it represents a link between the resources and the visitors and make places
accessible and provide visitors with insights into a site [
2
]. Nevertheless, nature interpretation is a
component of contemporary conservation area management planning in Kenya [
58
]. Some of the forms
of nature interpretation found in Kenya’s attraction sites include the printed word (maps, guidebooks,
pamphlets), tour guiding services, visitor codes of conduct, and orientation signage. Further to
these interpretative displays (storyboards or audiovisual displays) are visitor centres, mechanical or
interactive devices, and more [24]).
2.2. Theoretical and Conceptual Framework
Fishbein and Ajzen [
59
] define an attitude as the tendency to respond to an object with some
degree of favorableness or un-favorableness. In other words, attitudes are likes and dislikes or a
tendency to react either negatively or positively towards a specific person, object, idea, or situation.
Elaboration-Likelihood Theory (E.L.M.) propounded by Cacioppo et al. [
60
] explains the diverse ways
in which a person evaluates the information s/he receives. Sometimes a person may assess messages
elaborately through critical thinking, while on other occasions through a more straightforward and
less significant manner [
61
]. Therefore, Elaboration likelihood is defined as a variable and can range
from poor to excellent as the likelihood of elaborate thoughts on a phenomenon depends on the
way an individual processes a received message and involves the cognitive and affective domains of
attitudes [
62
,
63
]. E.L.M. studies carried out by Ham & Sandberg [
17
] established that an interpretive
encounter provoking more thinking would result in more robust and enduring attitudes and resultant
behaviour patterns. That is, any communication which successfully stimulates an audience into critical
thinking stands a better chance of affecting attitudes than a conversation that does not provoke thought.
This persuasion theory is relevant to this study because forms of nature interpretation are persuasive
communication: tour guiding services, maps, orientation signage, and visitor codes of conduct.
Nature interpretation presented to visitors in MMNR was postulated to create an understanding
of the issues and interrelationships that exist amongst phenomena in the wild and how they affect
or can be affected by wildlife viewers’ actions or inactions. As a technique for presenting nature and
cultural information, nature interpretation generates understanding, herein referred to as the cognitive
domain of attitudes; consequently, this understanding shapes the affective domain by creating the
liking or disliking of the phenomena, and ultimately, the affective domain shapes the behavioural
intentions and behaviour displayed by the visitors while interacting with the flora, fauna, landscape,
and other aspects of MMNR. In this regard, tour guiding as a nature interpretation technique not
only helps tourists to identify natural and cultural phenomena, but will also reveal why things are
the way they are, the interrelationships therein, and their relevance to the environment and society.
Visitor information and orientation signage as another technique similarly helps wildlife viewing
participants to make responsible decisions, and navigate safely to their destinations. Lastly, visitor
codes of conduct, also referred to as rules and regulations, prescribe the appropriate and desired
behaviour and actions presented as do’s and don’ts. These interpretational techniques individually and
collectively shape the attitudes of visitors to varying degrees, consequently affecting their behaviour
and behavioural intentions, and thus impacting their support for conservation or satisfaction thereof.
In Figure 1, tour guiding services, visitor information, and orientation signage, and visitor codes
of conduct as forms of nature interpretation are the independent variables. Visitors’ attitudes are
considered as the intervening variable, while visitor management objectives are the dependent variable
and eventual outcomes. The premise of this research is that tour guiding services, maps, and orientation
signage and visitor codes of conduct are the objects that generate and shape attitudes amongst visitors

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 7 of 24
for support towards conservation and enhanced experience and satisfaction. On the other hand,
unfavourable visitor attitudes emanating from interacting with these forms of nature interpretation
will affect the realisation of visitor management objectives in nature-based tourism attractions like
MMNR; that is, deviance and lack of support for conservation initiatives and poor visitor experiences
and dissatisfaction. Thus, the first null hypothesis (
H01
) states that nature interpretation does not
influence visitors’ support for conservation in MMNR. The second null hypothesis (
H02
) postulates
that nature interpretation does not enhance visitors’ experiences or satisfaction of MMNR.
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 24
other hand, unfavourable visitor attitudes emanating from interacting with these forms of nature
interpretation will affect the realisation of visitor management objectives in nature-based tourism
attractions like MMNR; that is, deviance and lack of support for conservation initiatives and poor
visitor experiences and dissatisfaction. Thus, the first null hypothesis (H01) states that nature
interpretation does not influence visitors’ support for conservation in MMNR. The second null
hypothesis (H02) postulates that nature interpretation does not enhance visitors’ experiences or
satisfaction of MMNR.
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework. KEY: H0—Null Hypothesis. Source: Reviewed literature and
Researchers (2020).
It has been established from reviewed literature that focus has been limited to themes like
relationship between nature interpretation and visitor management [2,13,64,65], attitudes, or
behaviour regulation [16,19,54,66,67]; destination management [10,66,68,69], effectiveness [23,42,70–
74]; importance [43,45,65,74,75]; visitor satisfaction [65,75,76];and sustainability [7,14,18,41,43,56].
The current study not only sought to establish if nature interpretation influences the attitudes among
visitors, but also the extent to which the created attitudes impact the realisation of the enhanced
experience of satisfaction and support for conservation.
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Research Context
The study was conducted in MMNR, one of the most visited reserves in Kenya. For instance, in
2018, MMNR received over 291,017 visitors, as shown in Table 1, and a total of about 62,719 safaris
(tour) jeeps carrying them [77]. MMNR covers an area of 1510 Kms2 and teams up with vastly diverse
populations of big game; herbivores, carnivores, birdlife, and plants that breathe life over its rolling
landscape. For tourists who wish to spend a night or more in MMNR, there are many accommodation
facilities dotted in and around the reserve totalling over 7000 bed nights [77]. The wildlife reserve has
July and August as the high season months, with June, September, October, November, and
December as shoulder season months, the rest of the months are considered low season months.
Table 1. Monthly visitor arrivals into Masai Mara National Reserve (MMNR) for the period 2018–
2019.
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total
201
8 9396 11,87
0
12,83
6 9031 10,96
9
26,40
9
54,36
5
59,97
4
28,00
3
23,00
9
14,45
8
30,69
7
291,01
7
201
9
13,77
5
15,96
3 9124 11,19
0 7929
Source: [77].
This reserve was gazetted as a national reserve in the years 1951 and situated in the County
Government of Narok (C.G.N.), which manages the ecosystem, infrastructure, access permits, leases,
revenue collection, and other destination management activities. The reserve lies about 265 Kms from
the city of Nairobi via Narok town that is 105 kms away by road. There exists tarmac road to the main
Forms of Nature Interpretation
•Tour guiding services
•Visitor information and
orientation signage
•Visitor codes of conduct
Desired behaviour and visitor
management objectives
•Supports conservation
•Enhances visitor experience
and satisfaction
H02
H01
Dependent Variable
Inde
p
endent Variables
Intervening variable
Attitudes
Figure 1.
Conceptual Framework.
KEY
:
H0
—Null Hypothesis. Source: Reviewed literature and
Researchers (2020).
It has been established from reviewed literature that focus has been limited to themes
like relationship between nature interpretation and visitor management [
2
,
13
,
64
,
65
], attitudes, or
behaviour regulation
[16,19,54,66,67]
; destination management [
10
,
66
,
68
,
69
], effectiveness [
23
,
42
,
70
–
74
];
importance [
43
,
45
,
65
,
74
,
75
]; visitor satisfaction [
65
,
75
,
76
]; and sustainability [
7
,
14
,
18
,
41
,
43
,
56
]. The current
study not only sought to establish if nature interpretation influences the attitudes among visitors, but also
the extent to which the created attitudes impact the realisation of the enhanced experience of satisfaction
and support for conservation.
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Research Context
The study was conducted in MMNR, one of the most visited reserves in Kenya. For instance, in
2018, MMNR received over 291,017 visitors, as shown in Table 1, and a total of about 62,719 safaris
(tour) jeeps carrying them [
77
]. MMNR covers an area of 1510 Kms
2
and teams up with vastly diverse
populations of big game; herbivores, carnivores, birdlife, and plants that breathe life over its rolling
landscape. For tourists who wish to spend a night or more in MMNR, there are many accommodation
facilities dotted in and around the reserve totalling over 7000 bed nights [
77
]. The wildlife reserve has
July and August as the high season months, with June, September, October, November, and December
as shoulder season months, the rest of the months are considered low season months.
Table 1.
Monthly visitor arrivals into Masai Mara National Reserve (MMNR) for the period 2018–2019.
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Total
2018 9396
11,870 12,836
9031
10,969 26,409 54,365 59,974 28,003 23,009 14,458 30,697 291,017
2019
13,775 15,963
9124
11,190
7929
Source: [77].
This reserve was gazetted as a national reserve in the years 1951 and situated in the County
Government of Narok (C.G.N.), which manages the ecosystem, infrastructure, access permits, leases,
revenue collection, and other destination management activities. The reserve lies about 265 Kms
from the city of Nairobi via Narok town that is 105 kms away by road. There exists tarmac road
to the main gate Sekenani, and this vast and remote wildlife reserve is served with a network of

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 8 of 24
all-weather roads. Game drive trails within MMNR are preferably accessed experienced safari tour
guides on four-wheel-drive vehicles. In this exciting ecosystem, visitors require nature interpretation
and wilderness navigation from experienced driver guides to get an enriching experience. Besides,
given the distance, MMNR, as a rich biodiversity-ecosystem, promises unforgettable experiences.
Many visitors to the MMNR are rarely day trippers but overnight that averages two to three days.
3.2. Research Design and Methods
The research adopted a descriptive research design using a survey and semi-structured
questionnaires to collect mainly quantitative data from visitors to the MMNR as respondents. The study
used visitors into MMNR as a transient population with a monthly average of 11376 guests which gave
a total of 22752 visitors as the study population. Data collection was from late January to mid-March
2020. These months were considered, given the relaxed atmosphere for the adequate provision and
access to various nature interpretation techniques, unlike the crowded frenzy associated with high
tourism seasons in the MMNR. The sample size of 351 respondents was considered the necessary
minimum and thus representative of infinite populations at a 95% confidence level and a 5% confidence
interval to enable the generalisation of findings. The study used a semi-structured questionnaire
consisting of mainly closed-ended items rooted on Likert scale items. This choice was informed by the
fact that, although attitudes are reasons for individuals behaviour, they are latent constructs that cannot
be observed directly but are inferred from overt responses using Likert scale items rather than being
measured directly [
66
–
76
,
78
]. Secondly, time and cost constraints compelled the use of questionnaires
to establish the perceptions and attitudes that nature interpretation had created amongst tourists to
support conservation and enhanced experience and satisfaction within a short time frame compared to
the observation method.
Questionnaires for the study were distributed to visitors through their tour driver guides at the
Sekenani main entry gate for filling at their convenient time. Receptionists at tourist lodges were
enlisted to recruit their guests as respondents for the study during check-in or check-out. The research
considered this procedure as the most practical and courteous approach for data collection, given that
tourists accessed this remote destination after a long and tiring journey on safari jeeps. The filled
questionnaires were dropped at the designated reception areas of the wilderness lodges, and at the
exit gates by the tourist vehicle drivers. Quantitative data collected was collated and analysed using
SPSS 25 software for descriptive and inferential statistics to answer research objectives. The study
variables were subjected to the Pearsons’s goodness-of-fit chi-square test to evaluate how well a
proposed model fits or predicts research data set. This test is said to give valid results under four
assumptions that is, the variables are categorical; the observations are independent; the categorical
variables must be mutually exclusive, and lastly that the sample is large enough but generates less than
five counts per category of grouped data. These are conditions that the data collected and collated for
the current study met. Consequently, a spearman ranked order correlation test was used to establish
the strength of the relationship between the attitudes created by nature interpretation versus visitors
support of conservation and enhanced visitor experiences at MMNR. This correlation was used to
test the hypothesis because the questionnaire predominantly had ordinal data. On the other hand,
content analysis in NVIVO (version 12) was used to analyse the qualitative data from open-ended
questionnaire items to establish themes. Eventually, the research employed tables and charts to present
study findings.
4. Results
4.1. Demographics of the Respondents
The study had a sample (n) size of 351 respondents, which accounted for a 54.8% response rate
after administering 640 questionnaires in total for the survey, a shortfall necessitated by the challenges
associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Out of 351 respondents, 49.9% were non-residents, 32% were

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 9 of 24
Kenyan citizens, while a further 18.1% were foreigners residending in Kenya. Concerning the gender
composition of the respondents (n=351), 54.6% were females, 44.7% males, while another 0.6% never
indicated their gender. This result is indicative that there are more about 10 % more males visiting
MMNR that females, a statistic that implies men seek exciting wildlife tourism destinations more than
females. This is against the fact that in most human adult populations, the ratio of males to females is
nearly 1, with negligible variations [
62
]. On the age structure of the respondents, 49.6% constituted
those aged below 25 years, 39.2% aged between 26 to 50 years, and another 11.2% aged 51 years and
above. This result shows that MMNR receives more youthful tourists with over 88.8% (49.6% +39.2%)
aged below 50 years and a small fraction of those above 51 years. This result could be attributed to
the fact that MMNR challenging destination and has uncomfortable all-weather access roads traits
that are prime considerations for senior citizens’ travel decisions. As regards the educational levels
of the respondents for the study; 57.6% had college-level education, 35.5% University, 5% secondary.
This statistic is descriptive of an educated sample population that could adequately respond to
the study.
As regards the primary purposes of visiting MMNR, in a multiple-response questionnaire item,
the study established that holiday or nature-based activities (67%) were the primary purposes of visit
MMNR; this was followed by education and research (33%) as indicated in Table 2below. Business
and work were last at 10.8% of the respondents.
Table 2. Main Purpose of Visiting MMNR (multiple responses where n=351) [79].
No. Purpose of Visiting Frequency Per Cent Valid Percent
a Business and work 38 10.8 10.9
b
Holiday and Nature-based activities
235 67.0 67.0
c Education and Research 116 33.0 33.1
d Others 6 1.7 1.7
Missing values 1 0.3
4.2. Visitor Attitudes Towards Forms of Nature Interpretation in the MMNR
The study delved into finding out the various forms of nature interpretation found in MMNR by
the visiting public.
From Figure 2, 93% of respondents indicated that tour guides in MMNR are knowledgeable as
represented by strongly agree (56%) and agree (37%). Neither agree or disagree followed at (4%),
and last was disagree, and strongly disagree with 1% each, a further 2% was representing missing
values. On the questionnaire item as to whether tour guides in MMNR were presentable, a modest 81%
had positive attitudes expressed by strongly agree (34%) and agree (47%). Neither agree nor disagree
that depicted an ambivalence had 8%. Negative attitudes were represented by 6% of the respondents,
that is, disagree at 4%, and strongly disagree with 5% and missing values of 6%.

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 10 of 24
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 24
Figure 2. Showing visitors’ attitudes towards tour guides in Masai Mara National Reserve (MMNR)
(n = 351) [79].
On the third attitude dummy for tour guiding, the interview sought to find out visitors’ views
as to whether tour guides require specialised training to improve their nature interpretation skills,
61% were affirmative, that is, strongly agree (15%), and agree (46%). Further to these findings, 23%
of the respondents showed ambivalence (neither agree nor disagree) to this questionnaire attitude
item. Similarly, like other attributes on tour guiding, a small portion of the respondents showed
negative attitudes (9%); 6% disagreed and another 3% strongly disagreeing that tour guides’ need
further training to enhance their nature interpretation skills.
Study results in Figure 3 explicitly show that the respondents had positive attitudes towards
visitor information and signage. The questionnaire item, visitor signage are easy to understand and
follow had the highest positive responses; 86% of the respondents responded affirmatively; 54%
agree, and 32% strongly agree. Those with negative attitudes were few comprising a small aggregate
total of 4%; 3% disagree, and 1% strongly disagree. 7% of the respondents neither agreed nor
disagreed with the statement and a further 2% missing as missing values.
Responses on visitor information and signage are adequate to meet user needs came second,
with over 72% positive responses and these attitudes; 51% agree, and 21% strongly agree (Figure 3
above). In this category of questions on Visitor information and signage, this questionnaire item had
relatively higher negative responses totalling 15%; 10% disagree, and 5% strongly disagree.
Ambivalence and missing values recorded 8% and 5%, respectively. Last in this set of questions was
whether reserve users followed visitor information and signage, slightly more than half of the
respondents (52%) showed positive attitudes; 38% agreed, and another 14% agreed strongly. In this
set of questionnaire items, “visitor signage is followed by reserve users” had the highest ambivalence
(35%) and missing values (6%) (Figure 3).
195
118
53
130
166
161
13
27
82
3
15
22
4
7
11
6
18
22
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Tour guides are Knowledgeable
Tour guides are presentable
Tour guides require specialized training to improve
skills
Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Missing values
Figure 2.
Showing visitors’ attitudes towards tour guides in Masai Mara National Reserve (MMNR)
(n=351) [79].
Study results revealed that 78.1% of the respondents recognised the availability of tour guiding
services in the MMNR, as detailed in Table 3. It was followed closely by visitor information and
orientation signage, visitor codes (16.2%) came at a distant third, and lastly, Others (1.7%).
Table 3. Forms of Nature Interpretation in MMNR (where n=351) [79].
No. Forms of Nature Interpretation Frequency Per Cent Valid Percent
a Tour guiding 274 78.1 78.1
b Visitor information and signage 257 73.2 73.2
c Visitor codes/Do’s and Don’ts 57 16.2 16.2
d Others 6 1.7 1.7
On the third attitude dummy for tour guiding, the interview sought to find out visitors’ views
as to whether tour guides require specialised training to improve their nature interpretation skills,
61% were affirmative, that is, strongly agree (15%), and agree (46%). Further to these findings, 23% of
the respondents showed ambivalence (neither agree nor disagree) to this questionnaire attitude item.
Similarly, like other attributes on tour guiding, a small portion of the respondents showed negative
attitudes (9%); 6% disagreed and another 3% strongly disagreeing that tour guides’ need further
training to enhance their nature interpretation skills.
Study results in Figure 3explicitly show that the respondents had positive attitudes towards
visitor information and signage. The questionnaire item, visitor signage are easy to understand and
follow had the highest positive responses; 86% of the respondents responded affirmatively; 54% agree,
and 32% strongly agree. Those with negative attitudes were few comprising a small aggregate total of
4%; 3% disagree, and 1% strongly disagree. 7% of the respondents neither agreed nor disagreed with
the statement and a further 2% missing as missing values.
Responses on visitor information and signage are adequate to meet user needs came second,
with over 72% positive responses and these attitudes; 51% agree, and 21% strongly agree (Figure 3
above). In this category of questions on Visitor information and signage, this questionnaire item
had relatively higher negative responses totalling 15%; 10% disagree, and 5% strongly disagree.
Ambivalence and missing values recorded 8% and 5%, respectively. Last in this set of questions
was whether reserve users followed visitor information and signage, slightly more than half of the
respondents (52%) showed positive attitudes; 38% agreed, and another 14% agreed strongly. In this set
of questionnaire items, “visitor signage is followed by reserve users” had the highest ambivalence
(35%) and missing values (6%) (Figure 3).

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 11 of 24
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 24
Figure 3. Attitudes towards visitor information and signage in MMNR (n = 351) [79].
The last set of questionnaire items used to measure attitudes towards forms of nature
interpretation in MMNR was on visitor codes or rules and regulations. Similar to other types of nature
interpretation, visitor codes in MMNR received affirmative responses indicating positive attitudes
(Figure 4). Visitor codes are easy to understand and follow received on aggregate the highest positive
responses (89%), where 50% strongly agreed, and 39% agreed with the statement.
Figure 4. Attitudes towards visitor codes/do’s and don’ts in MMNR (n = 351) [79].
Only 5% of the total respondents had negative reactions to the statement, where 3% disagreed,
and a further 2% strongly disagreed. Ambivalence and missing values accounted for 2% of the
respondents each. Visitor codes are enforced to enhance compliance received the second-highest
positive feedback from 57% of the respondents, where 44% agreed, and 13% strongly agreed.
Negative responses accounted for 9% of the answers, with 6% of the visitors disagreeing, and a
further 3% on strongly disagree (Figure 4).
Interestingly, ambivalence was relatively high as 27%, while missing cases accounted for 7% of
the responses. “Visitor codes were observed/followed by reserve users” had an aggregate positive
score of 53%, where 40% agreed with the statement and a further 13% who strongly agreed with the
statement. An ambivalence of 31% was relatively higher compared to other attitudinal questionnaire
items on visitor codes. Negative responses in total stood at 9%, where 5% disagreed, and 4% strongly
disagreed (Figure 4). Missing values accounted for 7% of the total number of respondents.
114
74
50
188
178
132
26
29
124
11
34
11
5
19
12
7
17
22
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Visitor signage are easy to understand and follow
Visitor signage are adequate to meet user needs
Visitor signage are followed by reserve users
Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Missing values
176
46
46
136
156
139
16
94
110
10
20
19
7
11
13
6
24
24
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Visitor Codes are easy to understand and follow
Visitor Codes are enforced to enhance compliance
Visitor Codes are followed by reserve users
Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Missing values
Figure 3. Attitudes towards visitor information and signage in MMNR (n=351) [79].
The last set of questionnaire items used to measure attitudes towards forms of nature interpretation
in MMNR was on visitor codes or rules and regulations. Similar to other types of nature interpretation,
visitor codes in MMNR received affirmative responses indicating positive attitudes (Figure 4).
Visitor codes are easy to understand and follow received on aggregate the highest positive responses
(89%), where 50% strongly agreed, and 39% agreed with the statement.
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 24
Figure 3. Attitudes towards visitor information and signage in MMNR (n = 351) [79].
The last set of questionnaire items used to measure attitudes towards forms of nature
interpretation in MMNR was on visitor codes or rules and regulations. Similar to other types of nature
interpretation, visitor codes in MMNR received affirmative responses indicating positive attitudes
(Figure 4). Visitor codes are easy to understand and follow received on aggregate the highest positive
responses (89%), where 50% strongly agreed, and 39% agreed with the statement.
Figure 4. Attitudes towards visitor codes/do’s and don’ts in MMNR (n = 351) [79].
Only 5% of the total respondents had negative reactions to the statement, where 3% disagreed,
and a further 2% strongly disagreed. Ambivalence and missing values accounted for 2% of the
respondents each. Visitor codes are enforced to enhance compliance received the second-highest
positive feedback from 57% of the respondents, where 44% agreed, and 13% strongly agreed.
Negative responses accounted for 9% of the answers, with 6% of the visitors disagreeing, and a
further 3% on strongly disagree (Figure 4).
Interestingly, ambivalence was relatively high as 27%, while missing cases accounted for 7% of
the responses. “Visitor codes were observed/followed by reserve users” had an aggregate positive
score of 53%, where 40% agreed with the statement and a further 13% who strongly agreed with the
statement. An ambivalence of 31% was relatively higher compared to other attitudinal questionnaire
items on visitor codes. Negative responses in total stood at 9%, where 5% disagreed, and 4% strongly
disagreed (Figure 4). Missing values accounted for 7% of the total number of respondents.
114
74
50
188
178
132
26
29
124
11
34
11
5
19
12
7
17
22
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Visitor signage are easy to understand and follow
Visitor signage are adequate to meet user needs
Visitor signage are followed by reserve users
Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Missing values
176
46
46
136
156
139
16
94
110
10
20
19
7
11
13
6
24
24
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Visitor Codes are easy to understand and follow
Visitor Codes are enforced to enhance compliance
Visitor Codes are followed by reserve users
Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Missing values
Figure 4. Attitudes towards visitor codes/do’s and don’ts in MMNR (n=351) [79].
Only 5% of the total respondents had negative reactions to the statement, where 3% disagreed, and a
further 2% strongly disagreed. Ambivalence and missing values accounted for 2% of the respondents
each. Visitor codes are enforced to enhance compliance received the second-highest positive feedback
from 57% of the respondents, where 44% agreed, and 13% strongly agreed. Negative responses
accounted for 9% of the answers, with 6% of the visitors disagreeing, and a further 3% on strongly
disagree (Figure 4).
Interestingly, ambivalence was relatively high as 27%, while missing cases accounted for 7% of
the responses. “Visitor codes were observed/followed by reserve users” had an aggregate positive
score of 53%, where 40% agreed with the statement and a further 13% who strongly agreed with the
statement. An ambivalence of 31% was relatively higher compared to other attitudinal questionnaire
items on visitor codes. Negative responses in total stood at 9%, where 5% disagreed, and 4% strongly
disagreed (Figure 4). Missing values accounted for 7% of the total number of respondents.

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 12 of 24
4.3. Attitudes Created by Nature Interpretation versus Visitor Management Objectives
The research sought to establish the effects of NI on the support for conservation in MMNR.
In this vein, the study identified three dummy variables to test visitor attitudes; these were reduced
negative visitor impacts, responsible visitor behaviour, and visitors’ financial support towards
conservation initiatives.
Overall, there was positive visitor feedback that nature interpretation indeed supports conservation
objectives in the MMNR (Figure 5above). First, 74% of the respondents gave positive responses that
Nnature interpretation leads to reduced negative visitor impacts in MMNR, represented by 44% of
the respondents who strongly agreed, and another 30% who agreed, as shown in Figure 5below.
Contrary to these attitudes amongst the majority, 17% showered negative attitudes presented by 13%
who disagreed with the statement that nature interpretation leads to reduced negative visitor impacts
in MMNR, and a further 4% who strongly disagreed. A small fraction of the respondents showed
ambivalence (6%) and that there were a few who never responded (3% of missing values).
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 24
4.3. Attitudes created by Nature Interpretation versus Visitor Management Objectives
The research sought to establish the effects of NI on the support for conservation in MMNR. In
this vein, the study identified three dummy variables to test visitor attitudes; these were reduced
negative visitor impacts, responsible visitor behaviour, and visitors’ financial support towards
conservation initiatives.
Overall, there was positive visitor feedback that nature interpretation indeed supports
conservation objectives in the MMNR (Figure 5 above). First, 74% of the respondents gave positive
responses that Nnature interpretation leads to reduced negative visitor impacts in MMNR,
represented by 44% of the respondents who strongly agreed, and another 30% who agreed, as shown
in Figure 5 below. Contrary to these attitudes amongst the majority, 17% showered negative attitudes
presented by 13% who disagreed with the statement that nature interpretation leads to reduced
negative visitor impacts in MMNR, and a further 4% who strongly disagreed. A small fraction of the
respondents showed ambivalence (6%) and that there were a few who never responded (3% of
missing values).
Figure 5. Nature Interpretation and support to conservation in MMNR (n = 351) [79].
As to whether nature interpretation provided in MMNR lead to responsible visitor behaviour,
67% of the respondents responded favourably, where 14% strongly agreed, and another 53% agreed
(Figure 5). 10% of the respondents did not agree with the notion that nature interpretation leads to
responsible visitor behaviour in MMNR. A negative answer that was denoted by those who
disagreed (5%) and strongly disagreed (5%). 19% of the respondents neither agreed nor disagreed,
indicating a stance of indecisiveness, whereas a further 5% were missing values.
In an attempt to establish if the nature interpretation provided in the MMNR helped to stir
people towards financially support conservation, study findings confirmed that 55% of the
respondents gave an affirmative response (Figure 6 below). It was explicitly shown by the 19% who
strongly agreed to the statement that nature interpretation stirs more funds for conservation and
another 36% who agreed. This questionnaire item had the highest level of ambivalence, where 28%
of the respondents neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement, with a further 5% appearing as
missing values. On the flip side, a total of 13% of the respondents disagreed (11%) and strongly
disagreed (2%) with the statement that nature interpretation stirs more funds for conservation.
Study results show that 78% of the respondents affirmed that nature interpretation created
attitudes that would reduce visitor complaints in MMNR, this was represented by 26% strongly
agree, and 53% agree in Figure 6 below. Only a small fraction (7%) of the respondents had contrary
views, as represented by those who disagreed (5%), and strongly disagreed (2%) that nature
interpretation would reduce visitor complaints in MMNR. 10% of the respondents were uncertain,
and thus neither agreed nor disagreed, while a further 3% were missing values.
155
48
65
106
187
127
20
66
97
46
16
37
13
16
8
11
18
17
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
NI leads to reduced negative impacts
NI leads to responsible visitor behavior
NI will stir more funds for conservation
Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Missing values
Figure 5. Nature Interpretation and support to conservation in MMNR (n=351) [79].
As to whether nature interpretation provided in MMNR lead to responsible visitor behaviour,
67% of the respondents responded favourably, where 14% strongly agreed, and another 53% agreed
(Figure 5). 10% of the respondents did not agree with the notion that nature interpretation leads to
responsible visitor behaviour in MMNR. A negative answer that was denoted by those who disagreed
(5%) and strongly disagreed (5%). 19% of the respondents neither agreed nor disagreed, indicating a
stance of indecisiveness, whereas a further 5% were missing values.
In an attempt to establish if the nature interpretation provided in the MMNR helped to stir people
towards financially support conservation, study findings confirmed that 55% of the respondents gave
an affirmative response (Figure 6below). It was explicitly shown by the 19% who strongly agreed to
the statement that nature interpretation stirs more funds for conservation and another 36% who agreed.
This questionnaire item had the highest level of ambivalence, where 28% of the respondents neither
agreed nor disagreed with the statement, with a further 5% appearing as missing values. On the flip
side, a total of 13% of the respondents disagreed (11%) and strongly disagreed (2%) with the statement
that nature interpretation stirs more funds for conservation.

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 13 of 24
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 24
Figure 6. Nature Interpretation and visitor satisfaction in MMNR (n=351) [79].
Second, in the positive attitudes was the questionnaire item that nature interpretation leads to
repeat visits in MMNR with an aggregate of 76% of the respondents giving their affirmation as
represented by 18% who strongly agreed, and 58% who agreed in Figure 6 above. Nevertheless, 9%
of the respondents either did not agree or disagree with the assertion, thereby reflecting ambivalence
with another 5 percent of missed values. On the flip side, negative responses accounted for a total of
9%, that is, disagree (5%) and strongly disagree (4%). On the questionnaire item as to whether nature
interpretation provided in MMNR will lead to visitor satisfaction, a total of 68% responses were
affirmative as represented by strongly agree (25%), and agree (43%) in Figure 6 above. Neither agree
nor disagree accounted for 20%, disagree 3%, and strongly disagreed and missing values accounted
for 5% each.
Further analysis of qualitative responses to open-ended questionnaire items on suggested
measures that can be used to improve nature interpretation in MMNR, Nvivo 12 results indicated
that over 87% of the responses gave positive comments, as represented by very positive (50%), and
moderately positive (37%), with only 13% somewhat negative responses (Figure 7 below). These
results generally denoted healthy positive attitudes formed as a result of nature interpretation with
tour guides, signage, and display boards are facilitators.
Figure 7. Summary of attitudes from qualitative data (n = 351) [79].
On further scrutiny of the qualitative data collected, seven main themes emerged; tour guides,
interpretation, nature, education, research, skilled and knowledge, as detailed in Figure 8 below.
Whereas tour guiding (17 counts) is a form of nature interpretation, results indicated that it plays a
central role in shaping visitor attitudes and behaviour at MMNR. Interpretation (11) came second
followed closely by nature (10), education came a distant fourth (5), followed by research, skilled,
and knowledge that all had a count of four.
92
64
86
187
203
150
35
33
71
19
19
9
7
14
17
11
18
18
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
NI will reduce visitor complaints
NI leads to repeat visits
NI will result in increased visitation
Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Missing values
Figure 6. Nature Interpretation and visitor satisfaction in MMNR (n=351) [79].
Study results show that 78% of the respondents affirmed that nature interpretation created
attitudes that would reduce visitor complaints in MMNR, this was represented by 26% strongly agree,
and 53% agree in Figure 6below. Only a small fraction (7%) of the respondents had contrary views,
as represented by those who disagreed (5%), and strongly disagreed (2%) that nature interpretation
would reduce visitor complaints in MMNR. 10% of the respondents were uncertain, and thus neither
agreed nor disagreed, while a further 3% were missing values.
Second, in the positive attitudes was the questionnaire item that nature interpretation leads
to repeat visits in MMNR with an aggregate of 76% of the respondents giving their affirmation as
represented by 18% who strongly agreed, and 58% who agreed in Figure 6above. Nevertheless, 9% of
the respondents either did not agree or disagree with the assertion, thereby reflecting ambivalence
with another 5 percent of missed values. On the flip side, negative responses accounted for a total
of 9%, that is, disagree (5%) and strongly disagree (4%). On the questionnaire item as to whether
nature interpretation provided in MMNR will lead to visitor satisfaction, a total of 68% responses were
affirmative as represented by strongly agree (25%), and agree (43%) in Figure 6above. Neither agree
nor disagree accounted for 20%, disagree 3%, and strongly disagreed and missing values accounted
for 5% each.
Further analysis of qualitative responses to open-ended questionnaire items on suggested measures
that can be used to improve nature interpretation in MMNR, Nvivo 12 results indicated that over
87% of the responses gave positive comments, as represented by very positive (50%), and moderately
positive (37%), with only 13% somewhat negative responses (Figure 7below). These results generally
denoted healthy positive attitudes formed as a result of nature interpretation with tour guides, signage,
and display boards are facilitators.
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 24
Figure 6. Nature Interpretation and visitor satisfaction in MMNR (n=351) [79].
Second, in the positive attitudes was the questionnaire item that nature interpretation leads to
repeat visits in MMNR with an aggregate of 76% of the respondents giving their affirmation as
represented by 18% who strongly agreed, and 58% who agreed in Figure 6 above. Nevertheless, 9%
of the respondents either did not agree or disagree with the assertion, thereby reflecting ambivalence
with another 5 percent of missed values. On the flip side, negative responses accounted for a total of
9%, that is, disagree (5%) and strongly disagree (4%). On the questionnaire item as to whether nature
interpretation provided in MMNR will lead to visitor satisfaction, a total of 68% responses were
affirmative as represented by strongly agree (25%), and agree (43%) in Figure 6 above. Neither agree
nor disagree accounted for 20%, disagree 3%, and strongly disagreed and missing values accounted
for 5% each.
Further analysis of qualitative responses to open-ended questionnaire items on suggested
measures that can be used to improve nature interpretation in MMNR, Nvivo 12 results indicated
that over 87% of the responses gave positive comments, as represented by very positive (50%), and
moderately positive (37%), with only 13% somewhat negative responses (Figure 7 below). These
results generally denoted healthy positive attitudes formed as a result of nature interpretation with
tour guides, signage, and display boards are facilitators.
Figure 7. Summary of attitudes from qualitative data (n = 351) [79].
On further scrutiny of the qualitative data collected, seven main themes emerged; tour guides,
interpretation, nature, education, research, skilled and knowledge, as detailed in Figure 8 below.
Whereas tour guiding (17 counts) is a form of nature interpretation, results indicated that it plays a
central role in shaping visitor attitudes and behaviour at MMNR. Interpretation (11) came second
followed closely by nature (10), education came a distant fourth (5), followed by research, skilled,
and knowledge that all had a count of four.
92
64
86
187
203
150
35
33
71
19
19
9
7
14
17
11
18
18
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
NI will reduce visitor complaints
NI leads to repeat visits
NI will result in increased visitation
Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Disagree Strongly Disagree Missing values
Figure 7. Summary of attitudes from qualitative data (n=351) [79].

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 14 of 24
On further scrutiny of the qualitative data collected, seven main themes emerged; tour guides,
interpretation, nature, education, research, skilled and knowledge, as detailed in Figure 8below.
Whereas tour guiding (17 counts) is a form of nature interpretation, results indicated that it plays a
central role in shaping visitor attitudes and behaviour at MMNR. Interpretation (11) came second
followed closely by nature (10), education came a distant fourth (5), followed by research, skilled,
and knowledge that all had a count of four.
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 24
Figure 8. Key themes that emerged from qualitative data (n = 351) [79].
These results were further amplified by a frequency query of the thirty (30) most used words in
the qualitative responses. This word frequency query revealed that although ‘guides’ had the highest
weighted frequency, education had the highest word count and second-highest weighted percentage
(Figure 9 below). Of the seven themes identified in Figure 8 above, five were among the top ten words
with the highest count. These are education (1st) with 34 counts, followed by guides (2nd) with 30
counts, and nature (5th) with 17 counts, interpretation (7th) with 13 counts, and skilled (9th), with 13
counts also. The research was ranked 11th with 11 counts, and lastly, knowledge ranked 17th with
nine counts. These qualitative analysis results revealed the fact that nature interpretation is an
educational activity, with eleven of the top thirty keywords relating to nature interpretation and
education (Figure 9. These are education (ranked 1st), guides (2nd) nature (5th), training (6th),
interpretation (7th), rules (8th), research (11th), signage (12th), knowledge (17th), languages (24th),
and awareness which is ranked 25th (Figure 9).
Figure 9. Counts and weighted percentages of keywords in qualitative responses [79].
On the other hand, verbs relating to the improvement of nature interpretation that emerged
amongst the thirty keywords query are, improve (ranked 3rd), enhance (10th), provide, good, help,
advanced, needed, done (26th), ensure (28th), increase (29th), and reduce (30th). These findings
indeed highlighted that there is always room for continual improvement for nature interpretation to
be effective in the long run. Enhanced and regular awareness creation and training of tour guides
and visitor information should be programmed and executed diligently. On the other hand, visitor
17
11
10
5
4
4
4
0 5 10 15 20
tour guides
interpretation
nature
education
research
skilled
knowledge
Frequency
key themes
34
30
28
21
17 16
13 13 13
11 11 11 11 10 10 10 998777665555 55
4.33 4.70 4.33 3.50 2.83
1.37 2.17 2.17 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.58 1.67 1.44 0.92 1.50 1.50 0.92 1.17 1.17 0.75 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.75 0.75 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
education
guides
improve
tour
nature
training
interpretation
rules
skills
enhance
research
signages
use
infrastructure
provide
good
knowledge
visitors
public
help
roads
advanced
needed
languages
awareness
done
park
ensure
increase
reduce
Count Weighted Percentage (%)
Figure 8. Key themes that emerged from qualitative data (n=351) [79].
These results were further amplified by a frequency query of the thirty (30) most used words in
the qualitative responses. This word frequency query revealed that although ‘guides’ had the highest
weighted frequency, education had the highest word count and second-highest weighted percentage
(Figure 9below). Of the seven themes identified in Figure 8above, five were among the top ten
words with the highest count. These are education (1st) with 34 counts, followed by guides (2nd)
with 30 counts, and nature (5th) with 17 counts, interpretation (7th) with 13 counts, and skilled (9th),
with 13 counts also. The research was ranked 11th with 11 counts, and lastly, knowledge ranked
17th with nine counts. These qualitative analysis results revealed the fact that nature interpretation
is an educational activity, with eleven of the top thirty keywords relating to nature interpretation
and education (Figure 9. These are education (ranked 1st), guides (2nd) nature (5th), training (6th),
interpretation (7th), rules (8th), research (11th), signage (12th), knowledge (17th), languages (24th),
and awareness which is ranked 25th (Figure 9).
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 24
Figure 8. Key themes that emerged from qualitative data (n = 351) [79].
These results were further amplified by a frequency query of the thirty (30) most used words in
the qualitative responses. This word frequency query revealed that although ‘guides’ had the highest
weighted frequency, education had the highest word count and second-highest weighted percentage
(Figure 9 below). Of the seven themes identified in Figure 8 above, five were among the top ten words
with the highest count. These are education (1st) with 34 counts, followed by guides (2nd) with 30
counts, and nature (5th) with 17 counts, interpretation (7th) with 13 counts, and skilled (9th), with 13
counts also. The research was ranked 11th with 11 counts, and lastly, knowledge ranked 17th with
nine counts. These qualitative analysis results revealed the fact that nature interpretation is an
educational activity, with eleven of the top thirty keywords relating to nature interpretation and
education (Figure 9. These are education (ranked 1st), guides (2nd) nature (5th), training (6th),
interpretation (7th), rules (8th), research (11th), signage (12th), knowledge (17th), languages (24th),
and awareness which is ranked 25th (Figure 9).
Figure 9. Counts and weighted percentages of keywords in qualitative responses [79].
On the other hand, verbs relating to the improvement of nature interpretation that emerged
amongst the thirty keywords query are, improve (ranked 3rd), enhance (10th), provide, good, help,
advanced, needed, done (26th), ensure (28th), increase (29th), and reduce (30th). These findings
indeed highlighted that there is always room for continual improvement for nature interpretation to
be effective in the long run. Enhanced and regular awareness creation and training of tour guides
and visitor information should be programmed and executed diligently. On the other hand, visitor
17
11
10
5
4
4
4
0 5 10 15 20
tour guides
interpretation
nature
education
research
skilled
knowledge
Frequency
key themes
34
30
28
21
17 16
13 13 13
11 11 11 11 10 10 10 99877766555555
4.33 4.70 4.33 3.50 2.83
1.37 2.17 2.17 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.83 1.58 1.67 1.44 0.92 1.50 1.50 0.92 1.17 1.17 0.75 1.00 0.92 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.75 0.75 0.75
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
education
guides
improve
tour
nature
training
interpretation
rules
skills
enhance
research
signages
use
infrastructure
provide
good
knowledge
visitors
public
help
roads
advanced
needed
languages
awareness
done
park
ensure
increase
reduce
Count Weighted Percentage (%)
Figure 9. Counts and weighted percentages of keywords in qualitative responses [79].

Sustainability 2020,12, 7246 15 of 24
On the other hand, verbs relating to the improvement of nature interpretation that emerged
amongst the thirty keywords query are, improve (ranked 3rd), enhance (10th), provide, good, help,
advanced, needed, done (26th), ensure (28th), increase (29th), and reduce (30th). These findings
indeed highlighted that there is always room for continual improvement for nature interpretation
to be effective in the long run. Enhanced and regular awareness creation and training of tour
guides and visitor information should be programmed and executed diligently. On the other hand,
visitor display boards and orientation signage requires regular maintenance and, most importantly,
monitoring and evaluation.
4.4. Hypothesis testing
The study sought to establish if visitor attitudes formed on forms of nature interpretation will
affect support for conservation in MMNR, Kenya. Using Spearman correlation, as shown in Table 4
below, research findings indicated that there is a moderate relationship between the two variables.
Attitudes created by nature interpretation moderately affected support to conservation with r
S
=0.426
and p=0.000. The calculated significance level is lower the given p-value of 0.05, meaning the results
are reliable up to a confidence level of 99% and an error margin of less than 1%. In this regard, the null
hypothesis H01was rejected, and the alternate hypothesis was accepted.
Table 4. Attitudes created by nature interpretation and support for conservation (n=351) [79].
Value Asymptotic Standard Error aApprox. T bApprox. Sig.
Nominal by Nominal
Cramer’s V 0.418 0.000
Ordinal by Ordinal Spearman Correlation 0.426 0.051 8.776 0.000 c
N of Valid Cases 349
a
Not assuming the null hypothesis.
b
Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.
c
Based
on normal approximation.
The research subjected the null hypothesis variables to a Pearson’s goodness-of-fit chi-square test.
The test was intended to establish if the proposed correlation model fits into and predicts the data
sets in the study. Research findings on attitudes created by nature interpretation versus support for
conservation (
H01
) established a
χ2
(440, n=351) =1685.65, and a calculated p value of 0.000 that is
lower that the given p=05 (T