Persian
Language
Geographical Research is Published in Persian Fulltext.
Volume 38, Issue 4 (2023)
GeoRes 2023, 38(4): 469-480 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2023/09/2 | Accepted: 2023/10/4 | Published: 2023/10/17
Received: 2023/09/2 | Accepted: 2023/10/4 | Published: 2023/10/17
How to cite this article
Kalooti M. Zoning and Locating Tourist Sites (Sports-Recreation) in Dena Area Using ECE and STCC Combined Model. GeoRes 2023; 38 (4) :469-480
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1519-en.html
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1519-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Zoning and Locating Tourist Sites (Sports-Recreation) in Dena Area Using ECE and STCC Combined Model
Authors
M. Kalooti *
Department of Physical Education, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran
Abstract (1082 Views)
Aims: Currently, the utilization of the carrying capacity, which denotes the maximal number of individuals partaking in a natural sport or recreational activity at a specific moment without inducing alterations in the surroundings, is widely employed in the realm of management. The objective of this investigation is to ascertain the recreational and sporting capacity of the Dena region within the Kohgiluyeh and Boyer Ahmad province.
Methodology: This is an applied mixed study carried out in 2020-2021 in Dena region. The Ecological Capability Evaluation Model (ECE) and Sport Tourism Capacity (STCC) were utilized. Additionally, the geographic notification system was implemented to finalize the layers and generate the maps. Subsequent to the validation of the present uses, three categories of capacity were approximated, namely physical, genuine, and effective physical board capacity. Consequently, appropriate zones were identified for a diverse array of concentrated and widespread recreational activities.
Findings The estimated daily capacity of the study site's physical carrying capacity was determined to be 18255600. In order to calculate the actual carrying capacity of the study site, five limiting factors and thirteen parameters were utilized, resulting in a capacity of 24152158 per day. These coefficients were then employed to calculate the effective carrying capacity of the management parameters. Notably, the highest rating was attributed to the "variety of recreational uses" and "diversity of sports uses" (3.4 and 3.3 respectively), while the lowest rating was given to "Sanitation and Health" (1.6). Consequently, the effective carrying capacity for the study site was established at 10626949 people per day. The study area was further divided into four zones based on concentrated and extensive tourism, encompassing the mountain-forest ecosystem, mountainous region, plain area, rangelands and aquatic ecosystems.
Conclusion: The extensive tourism endeavors conducted in the northern region of the study vicinity, encompassing the mountain and forest ecosystems, alongside the plain ecosystem, have resulted in the most substantial degree of detrimental impact.
Methodology: This is an applied mixed study carried out in 2020-2021 in Dena region. The Ecological Capability Evaluation Model (ECE) and Sport Tourism Capacity (STCC) were utilized. Additionally, the geographic notification system was implemented to finalize the layers and generate the maps. Subsequent to the validation of the present uses, three categories of capacity were approximated, namely physical, genuine, and effective physical board capacity. Consequently, appropriate zones were identified for a diverse array of concentrated and widespread recreational activities.
Findings The estimated daily capacity of the study site's physical carrying capacity was determined to be 18255600. In order to calculate the actual carrying capacity of the study site, five limiting factors and thirteen parameters were utilized, resulting in a capacity of 24152158 per day. These coefficients were then employed to calculate the effective carrying capacity of the management parameters. Notably, the highest rating was attributed to the "variety of recreational uses" and "diversity of sports uses" (3.4 and 3.3 respectively), while the lowest rating was given to "Sanitation and Health" (1.6). Consequently, the effective carrying capacity for the study site was established at 10626949 people per day. The study area was further divided into four zones based on concentrated and extensive tourism, encompassing the mountain-forest ecosystem, mountainous region, plain area, rangelands and aquatic ecosystems.
Conclusion: The extensive tourism endeavors conducted in the northern region of the study vicinity, encompassing the mountain and forest ecosystems, alongside the plain ecosystem, have resulted in the most substantial degree of detrimental impact.
Keywords:
References
1. Altinay M, Hussain K (2005). Sustainable tourism development: A case study of North Cyprus. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 17(3):272-280. [Link] [DOI:10.1108/09596110510591963]
2. Ashok S, Tewari HR, Behera MD, Majumdar A (2017). Development of ecotourism sustainability assessment framework employing Delphi, C&I and participatory methods: A case study of KBR, West Sikkim, India. Tourism Management Perspectives. 21:24-41. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.tmp.2016.10.005]
3. Bahmanpour H, Taheri Hosseinabadi M (2019). Presenting the combined pattern of sport tourism site selection with Geographic Information System (GIS) and Layer Overlay (IO). Shebak. 5(41):37-49. [Persian] [Link]
4. Behzadnia M, Dorbeiki M (2020). Carrying capacity of nature-tourism in Ashooradeh Island in Miankaleh biosphere reserve, Iran. Geographical Researches. 35(3):205-213. [Persian] [Link]
5. Borowy I (2014). Defining sustainable development for our common future: A history of the world commission on environment and development (Brundtland Commission). 1st edition. Milton Park: Routledge. [Link]
6. Daniels M, Norman W, Henry M (2004). Estimating income effects of a sport tourism event. Annals of Tourism Research. 31(1): 180-199. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.annals.2003.10.002]
7. Devlin M, Billings AC (2018). Examining confirmation biases: Implications of sponsor congruency. International Journal of Sports Marketing and Sponsorship. 19(1):58-73. [Link] [DOI:10.1108/IJSMS-10-2016-0078]
8. Ehigiamusoe KU (2020). Tourism, growth and environment: Analysis of non-linear and moderating effects. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 28(8):1174-1192. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/09669582.2020.1729164]
9. Elahi Choren MA, Ramezanzadeh M, Einali j (2019). Estimation of physical, real and effective carrying capacity of tourism (the case of Nowshahr parks). Quarterly Journal of Human Geography. 11(4):582-599. [Persian] [Link]
10. Hoseinzadeh SR, Erfanian A (2015). Determining the carrying capacity of coastal tourism of Kish Island. Geography and Territorial Spatial Arrangement. 5(16):181-200. [Persian] [Link]
11. Jahani A, Shirani Sarmazeh N, Goshtasb Meygooni H, Etemad V (2018). The estimated carrying capacity of tourism in protected areas (case study: Qhamishloo national park and wildlife refuge). Environmental Researches. 9(17):55-66. [Persian] [Link]
12. James P (2015). Urban sustainability in theory and practice: Circles of sustainability. 1st edition. London: Routledge. [Link] [DOI:10.4324/9781315765747]
13. Lawson SR, Manning RE, Valliere WA, Wang B (2003). Proactive monitoring and adaptive management of social carrying capacity in Arches National Park: An application of computer simulation modeling. Journal of Environmental Management. 68(3):305-313. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/S0301-4797(03)00094-X]
14. Mahdi A, Karimi D, Farshchi P, Panahi M (2020). Presentation of a model of site assessment and ecotourism planning in protected areas with an ecological carrying capacity approach. Geographical Researches. 35(1):43-54. [Persian] [Link]
15. Martire S, Castellani V, Sala S (2015). Carrying capacity assessment of forest resources: Enhancing environmental sustainability in energy production at local scale. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 94:11-20. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.11.002]
16. Mashayekhan A, Mohamadi Calichi M, Rassam GH, Hoseini V, Jalilvand H, Mohalleh M (2014). Recreation carrying capacity estimate to support forest park management (case study: Telar forest park, Ghaemshahr, Iran). World Applied Sciences. 29(3):421-425. [Link]
17. Meadows DH, Meadows DL, Randers J (1993). Beyond the limits: Confronting global, collapse, envisioning a sustainable future. Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing. [Link]
18. Masoodi SM (2016). Application of multi-criteria evaluation and GIS to ecotourism planning in protected areas (case study: MianKaleh wildlife refuge). Journal of Natural Environment. 69(1):211-229. [Persian] [Link]
19. Montazeri Shahtouri M, Estelagi A, Vali Shariatpanahi M (2022). An analyses of tourism development in Iran emphasizing eco-tourism resorts. Geographical Researches. 37(3):459-466. [Persian] [Link]
20. Moradi A, Daneshpour A, Daneshvar M, Bahmanpour H (2019). Determine the carrying capacity of the tourism and recreational range of natural areas of Mashhad metropolis along the urban and sustainable urban planning. Geographical Researches. 34(3):445-454. [Persian] [Link] [DOI:10.29252/geores.34.3.445]
21. Nasrolahi Z, Jahanbazi N, Naseri T (2015). Province classification in terms of tourist attractions. Tourism Management Studies. 9(28):17-37. [Persian] [Link]
22. Nghi T, Lan NT, Thai ND, Mai D, Thanh DX (2007). Tourism carrying capacity assessment for Pong Nhake Bang and Dong Hoi, Quang Binh Province. VNU Journal of Science, Earth Sciences. 23:80-87. [Link]
23. Porkhosravani M, Shahzeidi SS, Azizi Zarandi A (2022). Evaluation of tourism development by systems dynamics model (case study: Shahdad City in the northeast of Kerman). Geographical Researches. 37(2):171-188. [Persian] [Link]
24. Saveriades A (2000). Establishing the social tourism carrying capacity for the tourist resorts of the east coast of the republic of Cyprus. Tourist Management. 21(2):147-156. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/S0261-5177(99)00044-8]
25. Sayan MS, Atik M (2011). Recreation carrying capacity estimates for protected areas: A study of Termesson National Park. Ekoloji. 20(78):66-74. [Link] [DOI:10.5053/ekoloji.2011.7811]
26. SCC (2015). Surrounding cooperative company, review of land use changes in the Central Zagros region using remote sensing technique and geographic information system. Yasuj: Department of Environment. [Persian] [Link]
27. Sianipar CPM, Dowaki K, Yudoko G, Adhiutama A (2013). Seven pillars of survivability: Appropriate technology with a human face. European Journal of Sustainable Development. 2(4):1-18. [Link] [DOI:10.14207/ejsd.2013.v2n4p1]
28. Spenceley A, Snyman S (2017). Protected area tourism: Progress, innovation and sustainability. Tourism and Hospitality Research. 17(1):3-7. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/1467358416646646]
29. Taheri Hosseinabadi M, Tayebi Sani SM, Fahiminejad A, Bahmanpour H (2019). Carrying capacity determine of the sports and recreational of the natural areas in line with sustainable planning (case study: The mountainous of Darakeh). Tourism & Development. 8(4):82-98. [Persian] [Link]
30. United Nations (2017). The sustainable development goals report. New York: United Nations. [Link]
31. The World Tourism Organization (2016). Tourism facts and figures. Madrid: United Nations World Tourism Organization. [Link]
32. Zhang H, Lei SL (2012). A structural model of residents' intention to participate in ecotourism: The case of a wetland community. Tourism Management. 33(4):916-925. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.09.012]