Review of DJSIR Data & Analytics’ Study

Review of DJSIR Data & Analytics’ Study

Mt Arapiles climb site closures – Regional Economic Impacts

Review Summary
This review provides an objective assessment of a Victorian Government presentation prepared by DJSIR Data & Analytics (DJSIR) which detailed the regional economic impact of climbing area closures at Mount Arapiles.
The DJSIR study draws secondary data from Tourism Research Australia (TRA), a study conducted on behalf of the Victorian Climbing Club (VCC) (Rowlands, 2021), and data scraped from theCrag open-source web platform (theCrag, 2025).
In conclusion, the study does not provide a robust foundation to reliably forecast the economic impact of climbing area closures at Mount Arapiles.

Major concerns include:

• Transparency & independence absent –no alignment with best-practice, no public release of the report.
• Scope inadequate – no clear scope outlined, assessment limited to direct spend, failing to account for flow-on, employment, supply chain and taxation benefits, no consideration of latent demand or future growth.
• Route quality and length ignored – no consideration cultural significance, reputational impact, the actual amount of climbing lost, or the loss of climbing that is accessible to the broader community (used by guides).
• Behavioural modelling absent – no data has been gathered to analyse climber substitution behaviour.
• Data reliability questionable – flawed multiplier risks underestimating climbing activity at Arapiles.
  The following review incorporates constructive feedback at each stage, identifying areas for improvement and encouraging refinement of the research approach.
  

Review Details

• Name of reviewer: Hywel Rowlands
• Date of Review: 3/12/2025
• Document reviewed: Mt Arapiles climb site closures – Regional Economic
  Impacts
• Author of document reviewed: DJSIR Data & Analytics (DJSIR)

Reviewer Disclosure:
This review is conducted by Hywel Rowlands, author of the VCC study titled ‘Economic Assessment of Rock Climbing at the Grampians National Park and Mount Arapiles.’ While I am a climber, this assessment is guided by objectivity and transparency so that the impact and economic risk of climbing area closures can be better informed and in turn inform political decisions accordingly.

Hywel is a transport planner with decades of experience developing methodologies that integrate qualitative and quantitative assessment frameworks. His work has supported cost–benefit evaluations across a wide range of transport initiatives, with a focus on evidence-based decision-making and policy alignment.

Study Context
DJSIR Study overview and context:

• A PowerPoint presentation of the DJSIR study was made to climbing advocacy groups, this can be viewed on the Climb Victoria web site (Climb Victoria, 2025).
• The PowerPoint presents a study that assess the economic impact of climbing area closures at Mount Arapiles. The climbing area closures are proposed under the Dyurrite Cultural Landscape Management Plan (Parks Victoria, 2025).
• DJSIR Data & Analytics is a Victorian Government team that sits within Economic Policy at the Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions.
• Currently, the Dyurrite Cultural Landscape Management Plan which details the climbing area closures is on pause to allow Parks Victoria, the Barengi Gadjin Land Council, and the community working group to complete agreed actions (Victoria, 2025).
  

Major Comments:

There is concern that the study lacks independence, given it represents a government-led review of a government initiative.

There is concern that the study documents have not been made public. This review is limited to the PowerPoint presented.

1. Executive Summary
   DJSIR Study overview:

• Using theCrag data and Arapiles climber surveys, the study estimates the resulting impact to climber trips after implementing restrictions set out in the Dyurrite Cultural Landscape Management Plan.
• It is expected that there will be a 16% reduction in climber trips with a corresponding reduction in regional spend of approximately $0.7 million per year.
  Comments:
  The Executive Summary is an appropriate overview outlining the method and results.

2. Objectives and Scope
DJSIR Study overview:

• The study’s objectives and scope are not explicitly stated but can be inferred to a degree from the methodology and findings.
• The study calculates the direct spend of climbing tourists.
• Regional income excludes surplus for Victorian climbers as the value is not exchanged in dollars and it does not accrue to local businesses (Approach Overview slide).
  

Major Comments:
Clearly defined objectives and scope are foundational to the credibility, transparency, and usefulness of any study. To assess whether the presentation aligns with the study’s intent and scope, the relevant research paper or report is requested. Likewise, the brief for the study should clearly outline the scope.

Tourism Research Australia (TRA) studies typically calculate tourism benefits by measuring direct visitor spending, its flow-on effects across the economy, and associated employment and taxation impacts (TRA, 2025). The DJSIR study is limited in its scope to direct spend, it’s approach does not align with industry standards exhibited by TRA which bases its calculations on the Tourism Satellite Account framework which is the UN endorsed international standard.

The statement “regional income excludes surplus for Victorian climbers as the value is not exchanged in dollars and it does not accrue to local businesses” at the bottom of the slide titled “Approach Overview” requires clarification. Such jargon is unprofessional, undermines transparency, and is simply unhelpful within a public document. Do we take this as meaning that the economic value generated by Victorian
climbers isn’t captured in regional income statistics because their climbing activities don’t involve spending at local businesses? If this interpretation is correct, Victorian climbers are not considered in the economic impact which raises a major concern.

3. Methodology and Data
   DJSIR Study overview:

• A custom-built program was built to extract numerical data from theCrag which contains climbing ascent logs. The program counted logged ascents and those tagged in logged ascents that did not log an ascent themselves.
• theCrag data is factored by 6.19 to account for people that do not report their climbing on the Crag, reference is made to the ‘VCC survey estimates’ as the source of the factor.
• Climber spend comes from unpublished data from Tourism Research Australia (TRA). This approach was chosen over concern of bias in the VCC study. The TRA data compares well with the survey and analysis work undertaken on behalf of the VCC (Rowlands, 2021).
• The study recognises several limitations to assessing the impact of closures. Weighting ascents allows the study to account for usage but not the importance of climbs that have a high difficulty.
  

Major Comments:
There is confusion over the factor applied to theCrag data within the DJSIR study. The study applies a factor of 6.19 whilst citing “VCC survey estimate.” The study undertaken on behalf of the VCC derived a factor of 14.1 based on logging behaviour surveys undertaken in December 2020/January 2021 for ascents logged in 2018/2019. The DJSIR study describes some of the factors applied to theCrag data within the VCC study as inflationary despite the study validating the number of climbing days with traffic survey data. In the absence of data that is representative of climber logging behaviour and supports alternative factors, the rationale for adopting a lower adjustment factor is unclear and appears to risk significant underreporting of climber activity.

Debating the significance of these factors is likely moot. The continued use of parameters derived from the 2010 and 2019 surveys warrants scrutiny, as the behavioural data reflects logging practices from 2018–2019. Anecdotal evidence suggests these behaviours have since shifted, necessitating a new survey. The change appears to have been triggered in 2019 following Parks Victoria’s publication of theCrag data, which misrepresented the climbing community.

The TRA data sample on climber activity and expenditure has not been assessed for representativeness. There are concerns that the small sample may not reliably reflect broader patterns or behaviours within the climbing community. A low sample can easily skew the average spend and the length of stay which would impact the economic calculation. Achieving a representative sample is critical in an economic study. If the sample doesn’t reflect the broad community policy decisions can be inequitable.

The methodology for weighting climbing area attractiveness is limited to weighting site closures by logging history. The methodology for weighting climbing area attractiveness appears uninformed by consultation or literature. The study fails to consider a range of climbing route metrics that would inform the extent and quality of climbing lost. Length, quality and historical significance aren’t factored into the study. These are all metrics that are available within guidebooks and on theCrag. Furthermore, climbing literature identifies many of the iconic climbs at Mount Arapiles that draw international tourists.
School groups and guiding companies take care in selecting climbs that are safer and can be climbed by children, these climbs have a significant value not only commercially but for the broader Victorian community that are not equipped or skilled to make such ascents.

The DJSIR study does not discuss key assumptions or their sensitivity to forecasts. A prudent step, especially given the absence of primary data.

Minor comments:
The presentation slide “Estimating the Annual Number of Climber Trips” highlights data drawn from a study undertaken on behalf of the Victorian Climbing Club and cites the study inconsistently and incorrectly including “2018 VCC survey,” “VCC Survey Estimates,” and “Rowlands (2021).”

5. Analysis and Results
   DJSIR Study overview:

• It is estimated that Mt Arapiles had 13,000 individual climber trips in 2023/24.
• The study provides a range of potential economic impact from no loss to tourism dollars as the result of closures to a loss of $1.6million annually.
• Based on the proportion of climbers that visit both to be closed climbing areas and area to remain open within the same trip, it is assumed that 55% of those affected by the closures will redirect to nearby climbing areas that remain open.
• It is estimated that the Dyurrite Cultural Landscape Management Plan will restrict access by 36%.
• The calculation estimates a 16% drop in climber visits, 2,200 fewer trips annually, and a reduction in regional spending by $0.7 million per year.
  

Major Comments:
Studies in tourism economics show that the impact of destination closures are often non-linear leading to a disproportionate change. Closing any high value climbing would result in tourists/visitors spending less time in an area, not visiting as often, or not visiting at all. Climbers, alike tourists may shift their climbing to visit areas that remain open if they are still attractive propositions. However, other climbers that come for multiple climbing experiences may be deterred if part of the experience is lost. As no surveys have been undertaking to measure stated behaviour change, the study lacks suficient methodological grounding to forecast sufficient substitution behaviour and in turn a reliable forecast.

Minor Comments:
The DJSIR study report 13,000 individual climber trips each on average being 2.8 days, this estimates 36,400 annual climbing person days. The VCC study estimated that there had been 42,815 annual climbing person days at Arapiles in 2018 that are validated against trafic count data. This alludes to a decline of 15% in activity between respective studies. This is despite the extent of climbing area closures in the Grampians. You could reasonably assume that nearby closures have displaced some climbers to nearby Mount Arapiles, theCrag data does reveal an increase in reported ascents. Furthermore, rising climbing participation rates, expanding indoor climbing infrastructure and strong growth in equipment sales all indicate significant growth in the Australian and international climbing community (Australian Olympic Committee, 2025) (Deep Market Insights, 2025) (Linder, 2025). As climbing participation has grown, an additional consideration is whether the closures in the Grampians have suppressed climbing tourism at Mount Arapiles as interstate and international climbers are deterred from visiting Victoria as part of the experience has been lost. Furthermore, to what degree do interstate and international climbers bundle their climbing trip with other tourism activities in Victoria. These are all considerations that would inform the study.

10. Reviewer Recommendation
    It is recommended that the study considers:

• The release of the paper or report that supports the PowerPoint presentation together with the study’s brief.
• Clearly outline the objectives and scope of the study. Expand the scope to align with best practice and Victorian Government objectives.
• Understand the growth in climbing participation in Victoria, nationally and internationally as a background to the study.
• Given the growth in climbing participation, understand if there is latent demand in climbing tourism, how many people want to visit but don’t due to access and cultural concerns.
• Undertake surveys to generate current factors that can be reliably applied to theCrag data in understanding climbing activity at Mount Arapiles
• Examine the impact of closures at the Grampians on activity at Mount Arapiles.
• Undertake surveys to better understand the tourism behaviour of climbers, their bundling of climbing destinations, and their bundling of other tourism destinations and activities within Victoria/Australia.
• Consider the used of available climbing route metrics including climbing route length, star ratings, and identify globally iconic climbs, routes used for guiding, in addition to the frequency that routes are climbed.
• Expand the scope to include the range of economic benefits in line with TRA. Studies typically calculate tourism benefits by measuring direct visitor spending, its flow-on effects across the economy, and associated employment and taxation impacts.
• Clearly identify any economic benefits excluded from the analysis, whether typically included or not.

---

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Bibliography
DJSIR Data & Analytics (2025, 11 12). Retrieved from Climbing Victoria:
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/66a1c7954fb4c3304f0254ec/t/689470a
663a89c63d2f0c7f5/1754558636581/2024-12-11+DJSIR+Report+-
+regional+economic+impacts.pptx.pdf
Australian Olympic Committee. (2025, 11 16). Sport Climbing. Retrieved from
https://www.olympics.com.au/sports/sport-climbing/?
Deep Market Insights. (2025, 11 16). Australia Climbing Gym Market Size & Outlook,
2025-2033. Retrieved from
https://deepmarketinsights.com/vista/insights/climbing-gym-market/australia?

Linder, J. (2025, 11 16). Gitnux. Retrieved from https://gitnux.org/rock-climbing-
statistics/

Parks Victoria. (2025, 11 14). Dyurrite Cultural Landscape Management Plan
Amendment. Retrieved from https://engage.vic.gov.au/dyurrite
Rowlands. (2021). Economic Assessment of Rock Climbing at the Grampians National
Park and Mount Arapiles.
theCrag. (2025, 11 14). theCrag. Retrieved from https://www.thecrag.com/en/home
TRA. (2025, 11 15). Tourism Satellite Accounts. Retrieved from
https://www.tra.gov.au/en/economic-analysis/tourism-satellite-accounts?
Victoria, P. (2025, 11 14). Engage Victoria. Retrieved from
https://engage.vic.gov.au/dyurrite

Other article to look at:

2021 Economic Assessment of Rock Climbing at the Grampians National Park and Mount Arapiles

President of ACAV arrested over stolen Parks Victoria cameras in the Grampians

From Conflict to Collaboration: Parks Victoria’s Vision for Arapiles

Reflections from Climbing Victoria