Data Dive: The Outdoor Recreation Economy (2023 review)

Each year, the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) puts out a report on the Outdoor Recreation Satellite account, giving a fascinating insight into the economic impact of the outdoor industry (in broad terms). The BEA uses the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) to define industries and sub-industries. The “outdoor recreation” industry doesn’t exist in a vacuum – it's a special report that aggregates all economic activity related to outdoor recreation across a range of more discrete industries. In simpler terms, that means that any kind of economic activity remotely related to recreation is included here. The industry produced “$1.2 trillion in economic output (2.3% of GDP), comprised 3.1% of U.S. employees and accounted for 5 million jobs in 2023.” (Outdoor Recreation Roundtable)

Outdoor Recreation’s Share of GDP

While real GDP for outdoor recreation grew by 3.6% in 2023, it outpaced the overall U.S. economy’s growth of 2.9%. This overall growth rate was a deceleration from the 10.2% increase in 2022. The surge in 2022 reflects a pandemic-era surge in interest – in 2023 we saw a significant deceleration of that growth. Not negative, but a return to more measured growth numbers. It’s encouraging to see that the growth of outdoor recreation continues to outpace the economy, but we’ll have to see in upcoming years if it can continue to maintain this trajectory (and where exactly that growth comes from).

Perhaps unsurprisingly, states like Hawaii (6.3), Vermont, (4.7), Alaska (4.6), Montana (4.6), and Maine (3.7) had the highest percentage of GDP associated with the outdoor industry. I tried to see if there were any meaningful relationships between states with Outdoor Recreation offices at the state level and growth/performance, but the relationship is far too correlative to draw any real conclusions. By and large, states with OREC offices do well, but they are often also states that prioritized these things prior to the institution of an official office. And, some high performing states (by both GDP% and overall impact) like Alaska, Florida and California still don’t have OREC offices.

Boating and Fishing supplants RVing

Boating and fishing emerged as the largest contributors among conventional activities, generating $36.8 billion in value, ousting the previous leader, RVing. After a significant pandemic surge, RVing saw its value added drop in 2023. It was only the second time in the last 10 years that RVing value added decreased year over year. The pandemic plus low interest rates made for a massive surge in purchases, but since then demand has cratered and resales (especially in the #vanlife crowd) are seeing huge markdowns. RV production in 2024 is down 47%, although demand remains reasonably high.

Although I fully expect the industry to continue to contract in 2025, RVing remains incredibly impactful in the overall picture, generating $26.3 billion in value added. Hipcamp, the largest camping OTA, recently purchased RV camping site BookOutdoors. BookOutdoors focus was discovery and booking software for RV parks, cabins, and glamping resorts – I’m not sure if this deal was a sign that they weren’t finding enough traction to be independently successful (and therefore an inexpensive tech/data acquisition) or a more strategic play for Hipcamp to capture more of the RV and campground booking market. It seems a likely growth pathway for Hipcamp to move into RVing (longer travel times, higher price points for RVs = more revenue for Hipcamp per booking) and also compete directly with Campspot. They also recently released a research report on RV camping.

“Supporting” activities and services contribute significantly

Supporting activities like travel, tourism, and local trips comprised 48.5% of the total value added in 2023, growing from 47.6% in 2022. As I mentioned above, the outdoor recreation economy comprises all activity related to outdoor recreation. The high percentage of value tied to overall travel and tourism shows how connected outdoor recreation is with travel and hospitality. Additionally, the arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and food services industry contributed the most overall ($165.2 billion) to outdoor recreation, followed closely by retail. In many ways, these ‘supporting’ things are actually the root of the outdoor industry’s overall impact.

I imagine that the influence of these sectors in the overall big picture will continue to emphasize the experiential nature of modern outdoor activities and continue to influence the way that destinations market themselves. Destination-based marketing that integrates cultural and food experiences is a smart strategy. People don’t just want to drive somewhere to hike, they want to eat somewhere interesting, visit a cute local shop, get their third wave coffee and stay at the latest boutique Airbnb, or hip-ified motel. And, that’s where most of the economic impact actually gets created.

The power of the industry

The outdoor recreation industry is often talked about as this massive force for good. The economic influence, as laid out in this report, is often cited by nonprofits and advocacy groups as a way to push for positive change—including public land protections, climate action, and infrastructure investment. But on the other hand…how united is the outdoor industry as a voting block? And are we even approaching it the right way?

It’s easy to see how folks in places like Boulder—where the climbing, hiking, trail running and skiing community dominates the culture—might think of the outdoor recreation economy as a mostly monolithic progressive industry. Those communities tend to support similar approaches to environmental protection and climate change, and it's tempting to think that's the direction the entire outdoor economy leans. But, the top drivers of the outdoor economy are boating, fishing, hunting, and RVing. Historically, participants in these activities lean more conservative, especially in rural areas where values like gun rights, land access, and limited government regulation hold sway. And, the same can be said for many of the companies and advocacy groups that represent those participants. So, while the Boulder trail runner might be pushing for stricter environmental laws and regulations, a Florida boater may be more focused on reducing restrictions that impact access to waterways.

The National Marine Manufacturers Association made donations to both Democrats and Republicans in the 2024 election cycle, including Bruce Westerman (R. AR) whose controversial draft NEPA legislation has drawn criticism from environmental advocates. The bill seeks to reduce the scope of required permitting and environmental analyses, which could potentially expedite infrastructure development. However, detractors raise concerns about how it would limit environmental oversight, reduce public engagement, and make an attempt to destroy NEPA in a “death by 1000 cuts”. Garrett Graves, a recipient of American Sportfishing Assn PAC funds, has repeatedly criticized the Biden administration for not approving more offshore oil and gas leases.

The RV Industry Association donated to Adrian Smith, a Republican representative for Nebraska, who has blamed the blocking of the Keystone XL pipeline for inflation and fought against EPA regulations on car emissions and electric vehicles. Is this really that surprising? Additional emissions standards will hurt an RV industry that’s already wary of declining sales, and the path towards electrification is a long and expensive one.

That’s not to say there isn’t common ground. The EXPLORE Act is a bipartisan piece of legislation that passed the House earlier this year. It aims to improve access to the outdoors with streamlined permitting, modernizing campground infrastructure, supporting gateway communities, and improved services for veterans and individuals with disabilities. However, it has not yet been passed by the Senate.

Is it realistic to think of the outdoor industry as a cohesive political force? Yes, everyone loves the outdoors (3/4 of Americans view the National Parks Service favorably), but exactly what we want and how we want to approach change can vary wildly depending on where we live and how we enjoy it. Hikers and climbers often focus on protecting public lands and fighting climate change, while hunters and RVers might prioritize things like affordable park fees and fewer restrictions on land use. The goals aren’t necessarily opposed, but they’re not always aligned either. The second Trump administration will call this dichotomy into clear relief. While his previous admin passed the Great Outdoors Act, it also removed many protections from federal lands and opened up leases for oil and gas. Incoming policies are likely to review and downsize National Monuments, weaken environmental regulations, and approaches to staffing may seriously affect long-time public servants in the Department of Interior, USFS, and more.

So, where does that leave us? If the outdoor industry wants to grow its influence in order to enact positive change for the environment and public lands, that means finding common ground. It also means recognizing that economic power alone isn’t enough. And it also means recognizing that the industries and activities that make up that economic power may have very different ideas about what’s “best” for the outdoors and public lands. At the end of the day, the outdoor industry certainly does have the potential to be a powerful force for change. But it’s only going to happen if we move beyond narrow definitions of what the industry is and who it represents.

‍