Bilingual
En/Fa
Geographical Research is Published in both Persian and English Full-text.
Volume 38, Issue 4 (2023)
GeoRes 2023, 38(4): 499-510 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2023/10/10 | Accepted: 2023/12/8 | Published: 2023/12/16
Received: 2023/10/10 | Accepted: 2023/12/8 | Published: 2023/12/16
How to cite this article
Hasani Moghadam M, Kalantari Khalilabad H, Rezghi M. A Critical Examination of the Social and Economic Strategies Employed to Accomplish the Advancement of Urban Tourism in the City of Kelardasht. GeoRes 2023; 38 (4) :499-510
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1540-en.html
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1540-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:
1- Department of Urban Planning, Ayatollah Amoli Branch, Islamic Azad University, Amol, Iran
Full-Text (HTML) (12 Views)
Introduction
Tourism is considered a social and economic phenomenon that constitutes the largest peaceful movement of people worldwide [Haile, 2017]. Today, the tourism industry, as a dynamic and comprehensive sector, encompasses all dimensions of society and the global system, and represents a phenomenon characterized by high dynamism in economic, political, social, and environmental changes. It is predicted that in the coming years, tourism will rank first among global industries in terms of revenue and will become the largest sector of international trade in terms of importance [Heydari & Tahooni, 2021]. Destinations provide the most remarkable images to attract tourists and maintain their global position [Vinyals-Mirabent, 2019].
Within this context, the thematic, spatial, and locational classifications of tourism define various patterns, with urban tourism being one such branch. Historically, cities have been the arenas of major transformations and continue today to showcase significant potential in various domains, including tourism, owing to their diverse elements and attractions [Mohammadpour et al., 2022; Piradmoradian et al., 2019]. On the other hand, spatial hierarchies and urban expansion reflect how a phenomenon grows outward from its core into wider territorial domains. Tourism, as one of the major spatial phenomena of cities, requires careful evaluation of its present status and trajectory toward sustainability, since this process influences economic, socio-cultural, physical–environmental, and institutional dimensions of urban territories [Movahed et al., 2022].
In fact, cities, due to their natural, historical, and cultural attractions are considered major tourist destinations. Urban tourism development entails both positive and negative economic, social, cultural, and environmental impacts. Striking a balance so that positive outcomes outweigh the negative ones requires strong managerial policies [Alipour & Bayandor, 2015]. Experience has shown that wherever tourism develops randomly, without planning or clear strategies, it often generates significant social and environmental challenges, and in the long run its disadvantages may outweigh its benefits. Accordingly, the concept of sustainable tourism has emerged over the past few decades as a means to reduce the negative impacts of tourism development on host communities [Saraee et al., 2019; Amininejad & Mozafari, 2021]. This notion naturally applies to urban tourism as well. Thus, sustainability in urban tourism necessitates systematic consideration of technical, cultural, political, economic, historical, and environmental dimensions, ensuring that tourism resources are utilized in line with present needs while preserving them for future generations [Sheikhi Chaman, 2020].
In recent years, significant attention has been devoted to the hypothesis of tourism-driven development [Hataminejad & Sharifi, 2015]. In advanced post-industrial societies, tourism is regarded as a new source of growth, while developing countries seek to benefit from global communication in the era of globalization [Mikulić et al., 2021]. Hence, in the contemporary world, tourism is widely recognized as a driver for enhancing the quality of life in communities [Baghaeenia et al., 2022]. Moreover, urban tourism, as a subset of the tourism sector, can play a pivotal role in urban management and sustainable development [Arabshahi & Taghdisi, 2018]. Nonetheless, it should be acknowledged that urban tourism is a complex, multi-sectoral, and fragmented activity, with its primary product being the sale of visitor experiences through the attractions, facilities, and services of a city. Effective organization of natural, human, and visual elements that contribute to environmental aesthetics represents the most effective way to enhance the quality of travel experiences [Ezatpanah, 2020]. Therefore, achieving sustainable urban tourism development requires adherence to principles and criteria whose proper organization can significantly advance this objective [Niknam et al., 2019; Heydari & Tahooni, 2021].
The city of Kelardasht, located in Mazandaran Province, is one such tourism destination with both national and international renown for its natural and cultural resources. Each year, it attracts thousands of visitors and, accordingly, has been assessed in terms of the principles and criteria influencing urban tourism development. An examination of Kelardasht’s tourism system indicates that the factors shaping the city’s tourism supply and demand exert varying degrees of influence. Existing shortcomings can be addressed by a rational understanding of the relative importance of other factors, and through comprehensive recognition of the multi-dimensional drivers of tourism development, more desirable outcomes can be achieved.
Therefore, the present study seeks to analyze the socio-economic strategies necessary to realize urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
Methodology
This study is of an applied nature and was conducted in 2023 in the city of Kelardasht, carried out in two phases. Kelardasht city, the capital of Kelardasht County in Mazandaran Province, covers an area of 1,323 km² and comprises two rural districts and one urban center (Kelardasht). The city itself occupies approximately 1,506 hectares, located at 36°01′ N latitude and 51°10′ E longitude. Its elevation ranges from 1,100 meters in the east and northeast (Lahou district) to 1,690 meters in the southwest (Roudbarak district). Kelardasht consists of eight neighborhoods of Hasankif, Garek Pas, Valval, Meka, Ejabit, Lahou, Roudbarak, and Majel and annually hosts around two million domestic tourists and more than 200,000 international visitors. Owing to its unique natural and cultural attractions, Kelardasht has gained recognition as a major tourism destination at both national and international levels.
In the first phase, through reviewing relevant studies and the comprehensive development plan of Kelardasht, the dimensions, criteria, and indicators influencing tourism development in the city were identified [Esmaeelzadeh et al., 2012; Babakhanzadeh, 2013; Ebrahimnia Samakoush et al., 2013; Akbarian Ronizi & Rastegar, 2021; Dogru & Bulut, 2018; Ariyani & Fauzi, 2019; Arthur & Mensah, 2006; Bakas et al., 2019]. A coding method was used to extract effective criteria. A list of dimensions, criteria, and indicators was compiled, after which duplicate or overlapping items were eliminated. The extracted factors were then organized into a questionnaire. The items were evaluated in two states: the current situation and the anticipated situation after implementing the indicators. To ensure content validity, the Delphi method was employed. Accordingly, the questionnaire was distributed among 25 urban experts and specialists in Kelardasht, selected through purposive sampling. Following expert feedback, revisions were made: overlapping items were merged, and irrelevant ones were removed. The revised questionnaire was redistributed to the same panel of experts and subsequently approved. The reliability coefficient, calculated using Cronbach’s alpha, was 0.81. Ultimately, six criteria and 27 indicators were determined to assess socio-economic strategies for tourism development.
In the second phase, the finalized questionnaire was administered to 384 Kelardasht residents, selected through simple random sampling. The sample size was calculated using Cochran’s formula. After data collection, the weights of each criterion and indicator were determined using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) [Saberi & Aflaki, 2015]. To rank the criteria, the Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) method was applied.
ARAS Method
Equation 1:
Equation 2:
Equation 3:
Equation 4:
Following these calculations, the criteria were ranked based on their relative utility.
A review of the upper-level planning documents for Kelardasht tourism revealed that, to date, only one major plan exists the Kelardasht Comprehensive Plan (2008), which covers both urban and rural areas of the county. One chapter of this plan addresses tourism, classifying attractions into five categories: natural, therapeutic, sports, cultural-historical, and accessibility. Suggested strategies in the plan include measures such as increasing tourist retention time, revitalizing and developing tourism hubs, expanding infrastructure and supplementary attractions, establishing traditional production centers, organizing ethnographic exhibitions and festivals, creating an ethnographic museum, implementing promotional campaigns, and developing parks such as museum parks, zoos, and forest parks.
Findings
The socio-cultural dimension of tourism development comprised three main criteria: (1) social and cultural resources and infrastructure, (2) education of citizens and tourists, and (3) the presentation of events and occasions.
The assessment of the socio-cultural indicators of urban tourism development in Kelardasht revealed that, in the current state, the indicator of showing respect to other people (mean=3.61) and the indicator of introducing cultural customs and traditions (mean=2.89) demonstrated the best conditions. In contrast, the indicator of consideration of episodic or event-related life in the city (mean=1.42) and the indicator of strengthening urban spaces to foster solidarity and shared human interests (mean=1.54) showed the weakest status among socio-cultural indicators of tourism development in Kelardasht.
Furthermore, the analysis of the anticipated situation under the implementation of these indicators indicated that the indicator of memorable elements, exhibitions, historical buildings, recreational centers, and museums (mean=3.68), along with the indicator of training in appropriate conduct and interactions with national and international tourists, and emphasizing its importance for the host community (mean=3.59), had the greatest influence on socio-cultural aspects of urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
Addressing the economic and investment dimension of tourism development is also of great significance. Accordingly, this study focused on three main criteria: (1) balancing resources and costs in the tourism industry, (2) investment in urban tourism, and (3) supporting the livelihoods of the host community, each of which encompassed several indicators.
The evaluation of the economic and investment indicators of urban tourism in Kelardasht showed that, under current conditions, domestic investment in the restoration and rehabilitation of historical and cultural sites and spaces attractive to tourists (mean=4.59) and development of capabilities and activities for urban recreation to attract investors (mean=3.60) ranked highest. Conversely, the indicator of tax exemptions for investors in the tourism sector (mean=1.21) and domestic investment in the restoration and rehabilitation of historical and cultural attractions in cities (mean=1.34) showed the weakest conditions in this dimension.
In terms of potential development under the implementation of the indicators, the findings revealed that tax exemptions for tourism investors (mean=4.57), business planning and continuity in the tourism sector to enhance the city’s and region’s economy, and provision of facilities for tourism investment (mean=4.41) had the strongest effects on the economic and investment dimension of urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
For the socio-cultural and economic-investment indicators that were found to be weak in Kelardasht, several strategies were proposed. To prioritize these strategies, the ARAS method was applied. The weighted normalized matrix for each strategy was then calculated, and finally, the overall ranking of the proposed strategies was determined.
The strategy of providing high-quality tourism services (K=0.073828) ranked first in priority, followed by the strategy of developing tourism infrastructure (K=0.071228) in second place. In contrast, the strategies of establishing tourism facilities and amenities in Kelardasht (K=0.030901) and developing information technology platforms (K=0.030814) ranked eighteenth and nineteenth, respectively.
Discussion
This study was conducted with the aim of analyzing the social and economic strategies for achieving urban tourism development in the city of Kelardasht.
In today’s competitive world, where all countries and cities strive to capitalize on their comparative advantages to outpace their counterparts, tourism, particularly urban tourism is regarded as an ideal opportunity for the growth and development of cities. Accordingly, policymakers and planners in both developing and developed countries pursue tourism as a development driver. In this regard, the present study, through the application of the Analytic Network Process (ANP), sought to achieve urban tourism development in Kelardasht and yielded relatively acceptable results that can be generalized to other similar cities. One of the most significant findings revealed that, according to citizens, urban experts, and tourism specialists, there exists a strong interconnection among the dimensions and criteria proposed for urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
From a socio-cultural perspective, the level of urban tourism development in Kelardasht if the proposed indicators are implemented showed that factors such as memorable urban elements, exhibitions, historical monuments, recreational centers, museums, as well as the education of appropriate behavior and interaction with both national and international tourists, and the attention to the host community, hold the greatest influence among the socio-cultural indicators.
From an economic and investment perspective, the results demonstrated that indicators such as tax exemptions for tourism investors, business continuity planning in the tourism sector to boost the local and regional economy, and the provision of financial facilities for tourism-related investment, exert the highest influence on urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
With regard to strategies for socio-economic development of tourism, the strategy of providing high-quality tourism services was ranked first in priority, followed by the strategy of developing tourism infrastructure. In other words, the enhancement of managerial aspects, particularly infrastructural development which itself implies the creation of tourism development projects has the most significant impact on urban tourism development. Moreover, the influx of investors, rising land prices, infrastructural expansion into new areas, and the subsequent land-use changes ultimately influence the morphology and urban fabric of Kelardasht. A closer examination of the criteria and sub-criteria further highlights the importance of investment in urban tourism, especially projects that can establish recreational, leisure, and accommodation spaces, as these exert the greatest influence on the spatial structure and urban skeleton of Kelardasht. Accordingly, pioneering projects in the tourism sector, such as the development of leisure, recreational, and accommodation spaces, play a transformative role in the spatial elements and urban morphology of Kelardasht. However, these impacts would be more evident once such projects are implemented, since existing investments in Kelardasht have primarily been concentrated along the city’s main arterial routes. Consequently, no tourism projects located outside the primary urban pattern currently exhibit a discernible influence on the urban skeleton, as the city has evolved organically over time.
Beyond the degree of influence of individual dimensions which, in this study, were categorized into five groups: socio-cultural, managerial-infrastructural, economic-investment, environmental-natural, and political-developmental the findings revealed that urban development and tourism are networked and interdependent. Therefore, while investment in urban tourism is of paramount importance, other factors such as service provision and infrastructure development, environmental sustainability, political development and international relations, marketing and promotion for market creation and retention, balance between tourism revenues and expenditures, urban aesthetics and landscape quality, reinforcement of socio-cultural resources and infrastructure, preservation of natural resources, supportive legislation for sustainable tourism, preparation of strategic planning documents, improvement of natural and environmental conditions, education for both citizens and tourists emphasizing mutual respect between host and guest, formulation of an urban tourism vision, support for host community livelihoods to enhance socio-economic vitality in destinations, event management, integrated urban governance, and the spatialization of urban tourism to shape tourists’ mental maps all play a substantial role, albeit to varying degrees, in achieving tourism development in Kelardasht.
The findings of Amininejad and Mozafari (2021) confirm the explanatory factors of tourism brand development in Bushehr Port, including awareness, comprehensibility, loyalty, advantage, identity, and economic-strategic quality. Similarly, the present study examined the socio-cultural and economic criteria for urban tourism development in Kelardasht, and its results are consistent with Amininejad and Mozafari’s research.
Niknam et al. (2019) prioritize factors related to the development of sports tourism in East Azerbaijan. Their results align with the current study, as both ranked strategies related to socio-economic aspects of urban tourism development.
Hataminejad and Sharifi (2015), who have explored the positive effects of urban tourism on four parameters of sustainable urban development (social, physical, environmental, and economic sustainability), also reached conclusions consistent with this study, which pathologized the social and economic strategies of tourism development in Kelardasht.
Kalantari Khalilabad et al. (2013) emphasize the identification of strengths and weaknesses in regional tourism to plan for sustainable tourism and ecotourism preservation. Their exploration of challenges and opportunities in their study area parallels the present research and validates its findings. Vinyals-Mirabent (2019) identifies various cultural, historical, and recreational attractions in tourist destinations, linking them to competitiveness among destinations. This corresponds with the present study’s findings regarding attraction identification and tourism competitiveness at national and international levels.
Dogru and Bulut (2018) have demonstrated a bidirectional causal relationship between tourism revenues and economic growth, indicating that economic development and tourism growth are interdependent. This resonates with the present study’s conclusions on the reciprocal relationship between tourism and economic growth.
The common pattern across all these studies lies in their emphasis on destinations and the reciprocal effects between tourism development and tourist destinations, reflecting the direct relationship between tourism-related criteria and the advancement of this industry in destinations.
To enhance urban tourism development in Kelardasht, the proposed strategies focus on promoting cultural and artistic activities, preserving and restoring historical and cultural heritage, expanding tourism infrastructure and facilities, and improving the quality of services. Strengthening tourism-related education and skills among the local community, promoting eco-lodges, enhancing security, and creating public and recreational spaces are also considered key measures. Furthermore, effective advertising and marketing, the use of information technologies, the development of tourism tours, environmental protection, and expanding inter-city collaborations can contribute to attracting more visitors and ensuring the sustainable development of tourism in Kelardasht.
Conclusion
The relationship between urban development and tourism is network-based, with investment in urban tourism serving as one of its most essential components. The presence of memorable elements and historical monuments in the social and cultural dimensions provides the foundation for both urban and tourism development, while educating citizens and tourists on interaction and communication transforms the area into a sustainable tourism destination. Moreover, in the economic and investment dimension, tax exemptions for investors and the provision of financial incentives for tourism-related investments stimulate the city’s economy and facilitate the development of tourism.
Acknowledgment: The authors express their gratitude to all individuals who assisted them in conducting this research.
Ethical Permission: No ethical issues were reported by the authors.
Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the authorship and publication of this study.
Authors’ Contributions: Hasani Moghadam M (First Author): Introduction writer/Methodologist/Statistical analyst (50%); Kalantari Khalilabad H (Second Author): Discussion Writer (30%); Rezghi M (Third Author): Discussion Writer/Methodologist (20%)
Funding: This article was conducted at the authors’ personal expense.
Tourism is considered a social and economic phenomenon that constitutes the largest peaceful movement of people worldwide [Haile, 2017]. Today, the tourism industry, as a dynamic and comprehensive sector, encompasses all dimensions of society and the global system, and represents a phenomenon characterized by high dynamism in economic, political, social, and environmental changes. It is predicted that in the coming years, tourism will rank first among global industries in terms of revenue and will become the largest sector of international trade in terms of importance [Heydari & Tahooni, 2021]. Destinations provide the most remarkable images to attract tourists and maintain their global position [Vinyals-Mirabent, 2019].
Within this context, the thematic, spatial, and locational classifications of tourism define various patterns, with urban tourism being one such branch. Historically, cities have been the arenas of major transformations and continue today to showcase significant potential in various domains, including tourism, owing to their diverse elements and attractions [Mohammadpour et al., 2022; Piradmoradian et al., 2019]. On the other hand, spatial hierarchies and urban expansion reflect how a phenomenon grows outward from its core into wider territorial domains. Tourism, as one of the major spatial phenomena of cities, requires careful evaluation of its present status and trajectory toward sustainability, since this process influences economic, socio-cultural, physical–environmental, and institutional dimensions of urban territories [Movahed et al., 2022].
In fact, cities, due to their natural, historical, and cultural attractions are considered major tourist destinations. Urban tourism development entails both positive and negative economic, social, cultural, and environmental impacts. Striking a balance so that positive outcomes outweigh the negative ones requires strong managerial policies [Alipour & Bayandor, 2015]. Experience has shown that wherever tourism develops randomly, without planning or clear strategies, it often generates significant social and environmental challenges, and in the long run its disadvantages may outweigh its benefits. Accordingly, the concept of sustainable tourism has emerged over the past few decades as a means to reduce the negative impacts of tourism development on host communities [Saraee et al., 2019; Amininejad & Mozafari, 2021]. This notion naturally applies to urban tourism as well. Thus, sustainability in urban tourism necessitates systematic consideration of technical, cultural, political, economic, historical, and environmental dimensions, ensuring that tourism resources are utilized in line with present needs while preserving them for future generations [Sheikhi Chaman, 2020].
In recent years, significant attention has been devoted to the hypothesis of tourism-driven development [Hataminejad & Sharifi, 2015]. In advanced post-industrial societies, tourism is regarded as a new source of growth, while developing countries seek to benefit from global communication in the era of globalization [Mikulić et al., 2021]. Hence, in the contemporary world, tourism is widely recognized as a driver for enhancing the quality of life in communities [Baghaeenia et al., 2022]. Moreover, urban tourism, as a subset of the tourism sector, can play a pivotal role in urban management and sustainable development [Arabshahi & Taghdisi, 2018]. Nonetheless, it should be acknowledged that urban tourism is a complex, multi-sectoral, and fragmented activity, with its primary product being the sale of visitor experiences through the attractions, facilities, and services of a city. Effective organization of natural, human, and visual elements that contribute to environmental aesthetics represents the most effective way to enhance the quality of travel experiences [Ezatpanah, 2020]. Therefore, achieving sustainable urban tourism development requires adherence to principles and criteria whose proper organization can significantly advance this objective [Niknam et al., 2019; Heydari & Tahooni, 2021].
The city of Kelardasht, located in Mazandaran Province, is one such tourism destination with both national and international renown for its natural and cultural resources. Each year, it attracts thousands of visitors and, accordingly, has been assessed in terms of the principles and criteria influencing urban tourism development. An examination of Kelardasht’s tourism system indicates that the factors shaping the city’s tourism supply and demand exert varying degrees of influence. Existing shortcomings can be addressed by a rational understanding of the relative importance of other factors, and through comprehensive recognition of the multi-dimensional drivers of tourism development, more desirable outcomes can be achieved.
Therefore, the present study seeks to analyze the socio-economic strategies necessary to realize urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
Methodology
This study is of an applied nature and was conducted in 2023 in the city of Kelardasht, carried out in two phases. Kelardasht city, the capital of Kelardasht County in Mazandaran Province, covers an area of 1,323 km² and comprises two rural districts and one urban center (Kelardasht). The city itself occupies approximately 1,506 hectares, located at 36°01′ N latitude and 51°10′ E longitude. Its elevation ranges from 1,100 meters in the east and northeast (Lahou district) to 1,690 meters in the southwest (Roudbarak district). Kelardasht consists of eight neighborhoods of Hasankif, Garek Pas, Valval, Meka, Ejabit, Lahou, Roudbarak, and Majel and annually hosts around two million domestic tourists and more than 200,000 international visitors. Owing to its unique natural and cultural attractions, Kelardasht has gained recognition as a major tourism destination at both national and international levels.
In the first phase, through reviewing relevant studies and the comprehensive development plan of Kelardasht, the dimensions, criteria, and indicators influencing tourism development in the city were identified [Esmaeelzadeh et al., 2012; Babakhanzadeh, 2013; Ebrahimnia Samakoush et al., 2013; Akbarian Ronizi & Rastegar, 2021; Dogru & Bulut, 2018; Ariyani & Fauzi, 2019; Arthur & Mensah, 2006; Bakas et al., 2019]. A coding method was used to extract effective criteria. A list of dimensions, criteria, and indicators was compiled, after which duplicate or overlapping items were eliminated. The extracted factors were then organized into a questionnaire. The items were evaluated in two states: the current situation and the anticipated situation after implementing the indicators. To ensure content validity, the Delphi method was employed. Accordingly, the questionnaire was distributed among 25 urban experts and specialists in Kelardasht, selected through purposive sampling. Following expert feedback, revisions were made: overlapping items were merged, and irrelevant ones were removed. The revised questionnaire was redistributed to the same panel of experts and subsequently approved. The reliability coefficient, calculated using Cronbach’s alpha, was 0.81. Ultimately, six criteria and 27 indicators were determined to assess socio-economic strategies for tourism development.
In the second phase, the finalized questionnaire was administered to 384 Kelardasht residents, selected through simple random sampling. The sample size was calculated using Cochran’s formula. After data collection, the weights of each criterion and indicator were determined using the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) [Saberi & Aflaki, 2015]. To rank the criteria, the Additive Ratio Assessment (ARAS) method was applied.
ARAS Method
- Forming the decision matrix: A decision matrix was developed to evaluate the alternatives. Rows represented alternatives, while columns represented the research criteria. Each cell reflected the evaluation of an alternative against a given criterion.
- Determining the ideal values: For positive criteria, the ideal value equaled the maximum value, while for negative criteria it equaled the minimum value (Equation 1).
Equation 1:
- Normalizing the decision matrix: Positive and negative criteria were normalized separately using Equation 2.
Equation 2:
- Weighting the decision matrix: The criterion weights obtained through AHP were applied to the normalized matrix to construct the weighted matrix.
- Calculating the overall utility of each alternative: The weighted normalized values were summed row-wise. The highest value of Si represented the best alternative, and the lowest indicated the worst. Since the optimality function Si is directly proportional to the values of xij and the weights wj, the alternative with the highest Si was considered most effective (Equation 3).
Equation 3:
- Determining the relative utility and ranking alternatives: To evaluate not only the best alternative but also the relative quality (utility) of all alternatives, the relative utility coefficient Ki was calculated (Equation 4) [Motahar & Shokouhibidhendi, 2022].
Equation 4:
Following these calculations, the criteria were ranked based on their relative utility.
A review of the upper-level planning documents for Kelardasht tourism revealed that, to date, only one major plan exists the Kelardasht Comprehensive Plan (2008), which covers both urban and rural areas of the county. One chapter of this plan addresses tourism, classifying attractions into five categories: natural, therapeutic, sports, cultural-historical, and accessibility. Suggested strategies in the plan include measures such as increasing tourist retention time, revitalizing and developing tourism hubs, expanding infrastructure and supplementary attractions, establishing traditional production centers, organizing ethnographic exhibitions and festivals, creating an ethnographic museum, implementing promotional campaigns, and developing parks such as museum parks, zoos, and forest parks.
Findings
The socio-cultural dimension of tourism development comprised three main criteria: (1) social and cultural resources and infrastructure, (2) education of citizens and tourists, and (3) the presentation of events and occasions.
The assessment of the socio-cultural indicators of urban tourism development in Kelardasht revealed that, in the current state, the indicator of showing respect to other people (mean=3.61) and the indicator of introducing cultural customs and traditions (mean=2.89) demonstrated the best conditions. In contrast, the indicator of consideration of episodic or event-related life in the city (mean=1.42) and the indicator of strengthening urban spaces to foster solidarity and shared human interests (mean=1.54) showed the weakest status among socio-cultural indicators of tourism development in Kelardasht.
Furthermore, the analysis of the anticipated situation under the implementation of these indicators indicated that the indicator of memorable elements, exhibitions, historical buildings, recreational centers, and museums (mean=3.68), along with the indicator of training in appropriate conduct and interactions with national and international tourists, and emphasizing its importance for the host community (mean=3.59), had the greatest influence on socio-cultural aspects of urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
Addressing the economic and investment dimension of tourism development is also of great significance. Accordingly, this study focused on three main criteria: (1) balancing resources and costs in the tourism industry, (2) investment in urban tourism, and (3) supporting the livelihoods of the host community, each of which encompassed several indicators.
The evaluation of the economic and investment indicators of urban tourism in Kelardasht showed that, under current conditions, domestic investment in the restoration and rehabilitation of historical and cultural sites and spaces attractive to tourists (mean=4.59) and development of capabilities and activities for urban recreation to attract investors (mean=3.60) ranked highest. Conversely, the indicator of tax exemptions for investors in the tourism sector (mean=1.21) and domestic investment in the restoration and rehabilitation of historical and cultural attractions in cities (mean=1.34) showed the weakest conditions in this dimension.
In terms of potential development under the implementation of the indicators, the findings revealed that tax exemptions for tourism investors (mean=4.57), business planning and continuity in the tourism sector to enhance the city’s and region’s economy, and provision of facilities for tourism investment (mean=4.41) had the strongest effects on the economic and investment dimension of urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
For the socio-cultural and economic-investment indicators that were found to be weak in Kelardasht, several strategies were proposed. To prioritize these strategies, the ARAS method was applied. The weighted normalized matrix for each strategy was then calculated, and finally, the overall ranking of the proposed strategies was determined.
The strategy of providing high-quality tourism services (K=0.073828) ranked first in priority, followed by the strategy of developing tourism infrastructure (K=0.071228) in second place. In contrast, the strategies of establishing tourism facilities and amenities in Kelardasht (K=0.030901) and developing information technology platforms (K=0.030814) ranked eighteenth and nineteenth, respectively.
Discussion
This study was conducted with the aim of analyzing the social and economic strategies for achieving urban tourism development in the city of Kelardasht.
In today’s competitive world, where all countries and cities strive to capitalize on their comparative advantages to outpace their counterparts, tourism, particularly urban tourism is regarded as an ideal opportunity for the growth and development of cities. Accordingly, policymakers and planners in both developing and developed countries pursue tourism as a development driver. In this regard, the present study, through the application of the Analytic Network Process (ANP), sought to achieve urban tourism development in Kelardasht and yielded relatively acceptable results that can be generalized to other similar cities. One of the most significant findings revealed that, according to citizens, urban experts, and tourism specialists, there exists a strong interconnection among the dimensions and criteria proposed for urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
From a socio-cultural perspective, the level of urban tourism development in Kelardasht if the proposed indicators are implemented showed that factors such as memorable urban elements, exhibitions, historical monuments, recreational centers, museums, as well as the education of appropriate behavior and interaction with both national and international tourists, and the attention to the host community, hold the greatest influence among the socio-cultural indicators.
From an economic and investment perspective, the results demonstrated that indicators such as tax exemptions for tourism investors, business continuity planning in the tourism sector to boost the local and regional economy, and the provision of financial facilities for tourism-related investment, exert the highest influence on urban tourism development in Kelardasht.
With regard to strategies for socio-economic development of tourism, the strategy of providing high-quality tourism services was ranked first in priority, followed by the strategy of developing tourism infrastructure. In other words, the enhancement of managerial aspects, particularly infrastructural development which itself implies the creation of tourism development projects has the most significant impact on urban tourism development. Moreover, the influx of investors, rising land prices, infrastructural expansion into new areas, and the subsequent land-use changes ultimately influence the morphology and urban fabric of Kelardasht. A closer examination of the criteria and sub-criteria further highlights the importance of investment in urban tourism, especially projects that can establish recreational, leisure, and accommodation spaces, as these exert the greatest influence on the spatial structure and urban skeleton of Kelardasht. Accordingly, pioneering projects in the tourism sector, such as the development of leisure, recreational, and accommodation spaces, play a transformative role in the spatial elements and urban morphology of Kelardasht. However, these impacts would be more evident once such projects are implemented, since existing investments in Kelardasht have primarily been concentrated along the city’s main arterial routes. Consequently, no tourism projects located outside the primary urban pattern currently exhibit a discernible influence on the urban skeleton, as the city has evolved organically over time.
Beyond the degree of influence of individual dimensions which, in this study, were categorized into five groups: socio-cultural, managerial-infrastructural, economic-investment, environmental-natural, and political-developmental the findings revealed that urban development and tourism are networked and interdependent. Therefore, while investment in urban tourism is of paramount importance, other factors such as service provision and infrastructure development, environmental sustainability, political development and international relations, marketing and promotion for market creation and retention, balance between tourism revenues and expenditures, urban aesthetics and landscape quality, reinforcement of socio-cultural resources and infrastructure, preservation of natural resources, supportive legislation for sustainable tourism, preparation of strategic planning documents, improvement of natural and environmental conditions, education for both citizens and tourists emphasizing mutual respect between host and guest, formulation of an urban tourism vision, support for host community livelihoods to enhance socio-economic vitality in destinations, event management, integrated urban governance, and the spatialization of urban tourism to shape tourists’ mental maps all play a substantial role, albeit to varying degrees, in achieving tourism development in Kelardasht.
The findings of Amininejad and Mozafari (2021) confirm the explanatory factors of tourism brand development in Bushehr Port, including awareness, comprehensibility, loyalty, advantage, identity, and economic-strategic quality. Similarly, the present study examined the socio-cultural and economic criteria for urban tourism development in Kelardasht, and its results are consistent with Amininejad and Mozafari’s research.
Niknam et al. (2019) prioritize factors related to the development of sports tourism in East Azerbaijan. Their results align with the current study, as both ranked strategies related to socio-economic aspects of urban tourism development.
Hataminejad and Sharifi (2015), who have explored the positive effects of urban tourism on four parameters of sustainable urban development (social, physical, environmental, and economic sustainability), also reached conclusions consistent with this study, which pathologized the social and economic strategies of tourism development in Kelardasht.
Kalantari Khalilabad et al. (2013) emphasize the identification of strengths and weaknesses in regional tourism to plan for sustainable tourism and ecotourism preservation. Their exploration of challenges and opportunities in their study area parallels the present research and validates its findings. Vinyals-Mirabent (2019) identifies various cultural, historical, and recreational attractions in tourist destinations, linking them to competitiveness among destinations. This corresponds with the present study’s findings regarding attraction identification and tourism competitiveness at national and international levels.
Dogru and Bulut (2018) have demonstrated a bidirectional causal relationship between tourism revenues and economic growth, indicating that economic development and tourism growth are interdependent. This resonates with the present study’s conclusions on the reciprocal relationship between tourism and economic growth.
The common pattern across all these studies lies in their emphasis on destinations and the reciprocal effects between tourism development and tourist destinations, reflecting the direct relationship between tourism-related criteria and the advancement of this industry in destinations.
To enhance urban tourism development in Kelardasht, the proposed strategies focus on promoting cultural and artistic activities, preserving and restoring historical and cultural heritage, expanding tourism infrastructure and facilities, and improving the quality of services. Strengthening tourism-related education and skills among the local community, promoting eco-lodges, enhancing security, and creating public and recreational spaces are also considered key measures. Furthermore, effective advertising and marketing, the use of information technologies, the development of tourism tours, environmental protection, and expanding inter-city collaborations can contribute to attracting more visitors and ensuring the sustainable development of tourism in Kelardasht.
Conclusion
The relationship between urban development and tourism is network-based, with investment in urban tourism serving as one of its most essential components. The presence of memorable elements and historical monuments in the social and cultural dimensions provides the foundation for both urban and tourism development, while educating citizens and tourists on interaction and communication transforms the area into a sustainable tourism destination. Moreover, in the economic and investment dimension, tax exemptions for investors and the provision of financial incentives for tourism-related investments stimulate the city’s economy and facilitate the development of tourism.
Acknowledgment: The authors express their gratitude to all individuals who assisted them in conducting this research.
Ethical Permission: No ethical issues were reported by the authors.
Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the authorship and publication of this study.
Authors’ Contributions: Hasani Moghadam M (First Author): Introduction writer/Methodologist/Statistical analyst (50%); Kalantari Khalilabad H (Second Author): Discussion Writer (30%); Rezghi M (Third Author): Discussion Writer/Methodologist (20%)
Funding: This article was conducted at the authors’ personal expense.
References
1. Akbarian Ronizi SR, Rastegar E (2021). The explaining and analyzing of the effective factors on the tourist satisfaction with tourism destinations case study: Dargahan city. Journal of Urban Tourism. 7(4):129-143. [Persian] [Link]
2. Alipour A, Bayandor M (2015). Sustainable tourism management (case study: Bojnoord city). The Socio-Cultural Strategy. 4(14):115-135. [Persian] [Link]
3. Amininejad G, Mozafari H (2021). Analysis and evaluation of effective components in urban branding with an urban tourism approach (case study: Bushehr Port). Journal of Geographical New Studies ,Architecture and Urbanis. 4(33):145-170. [Persian] [Link]
4. Arabshahi A, Taghdisi M (2018). Urban tourism and sustainable urban development: The study of the position, role and consequences of urban tourism developmen. Journal of Geography and Human Relationships. 1(2):397-416. [Persian] [Link]
5. Ariyani N, Fauzi A (2019). Analysis of strategic variables for ecotourism development; an application of Micmac. South Asian Journal of Social Studies and Economics. 3(3):1-12. [Link] [DOI:10.9734/sajsse/2019/v3i330107]
6. Arthur SNA, Mensah JV (2006). Urban management and heritage tourism for sustainable development: The case of Elmina cultural heritage and management programme in Ghana. Management of Environmental Quality. 17(3):299-312. [Link] [DOI:10.1108/14777830610658719]
7. Babakhanzadeh E (2013). Measuring the socio- cultural, economic and cultural impact of tourism development in Uramanat region. Spatial Planning. 3(3):145-164. [Persian] [Link]
8. Baghaeenia F, Shaker Ardakani M, Amrollahi N, Behjati Ardakani A (2022). Analysis of effective factors in the internal branding of selected hotels in Yazd with a qualitative approach. Tourism Management Studies. 16(55):41-77. [Persian] [Link]
9. Bakas FE, Duxbury N, Vinagre de Castro T (2019). Creative tourism: Catalysing artisan entrepreneur networks in rural Portugal. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research. 25(4):731-752. [Link] [DOI:10.1108/IJEBR-03-2018-0177]
10. Dogru T, Bulut U (2018). Is tourism an engine for economic recovery? Theory and empirical evidence. Tourism Management. 67:425-434. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.tourman.2017.06.014]
11. Ebrahimnia Samakoush S, Khaksari A, Latifi G, Damadi M (2013). Assessing the role of urban tourism in economic-environmental development of the city of Babolsar. Journal of Urban Economics and Management. 1(3):17-31. [Persian] [Link]
12. Esmaeelzadeh H, Sarafi M, Tavakolinia J (2012). Analysing tourism development approaches in local communities. Environmental Sciences. 9(2):119-142. [Persian] [Link]
13. Ezatpanah B (2020). Exploring effective driving forces in the future of tourism industry development in borderline cities (case study: Baneh city). Journal of Urban Tourism. 7(1):69-87. [Persian] [Link]
14. Haile A (2017). Sustainable tourism development in Eritrea: Assessing the potential of the tourism industry as an asset to economic development and poverty alleviation in Massawa and the Dahlak Archipelago. Canada: Royal Roads University. [Link]
15. Hataminejad H, Sharifi A (2015). Examines the role of urban tourism development on sustainable urban development (case study: Sanandaj). Journal of Urban Tourism. 2(1):61-74. [Persian] [Link]
16. Heydari R, Tahooni M (2021). Survey of economic effects of urban tourism of Tabriz metropolis. Research and Urban Planning. 12(46):17-23. [Persian] [Link]
17. kalantari Khalilabad H, Ghanbari A, Rabieefar V (2013). Ecotourism development strategies in Damavand city. Basire. 2. [Persian] [Link]
18. Mikulić J, Vizek M, Stojcic N, Payne JE, Časni AC, Barbic T (2021). The effect of tourism activity on housing affordability. Annals of Tourism Research. 90:103264. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.annals.2021.103264]
19. Mohammadpour S, Rahimi A, Abasian F, Aghnaee NF (2022). Assessing the factors affecting tourist's satisfaction with tourism destinations (case: Ab'o Atash park). Tourism Planning and Developement. 10(38):35-57. [Persian] [Link]
20. Motahar R, Shokouhibidhendi MS (2022). Ranking cities of Sistan and Baluchestan province based on cultural and heritage tourism capacity using ARAS technique. Journal of Tourism & Development. 10(4):175-198. [Persian] [Link]
21. Movahed A, Aghaee V, Ghasemi M (2022). Analyzing and spatial classification in urban areas to achieve sustainable tourism; case study: Ardabil city. Geographical Urban Planning Research. 9(4):1125-1148. [Persian] [Link]
22. Niknam K, Ahmadi A, Honari H, Moharamzadeh M (2019). Designing and explaining the management model of sport tourism development in East Azarbaijan province. Journal of Tourism & Development. 8(4):99-125. [Persian] [Link]
23. Piradmoradian Z, Kalantari Khalilabad H, Shamsoldin A (2019). Analysis of non-governmental organizations and their role in increasing tourism development capacity of Yazd city. New Attitudes in Human Geography. 11(4):449-463. [Persian] [Link]
24. Saberi H, Aflaki M (2015). Preference main route tourism of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiyari province using Topsis and AHP models. Geographical Researches. 30(3):259-274. [Persian] [Link]
25. Saraee MH, Noori M, Asiabani Z (2019). A sustainable tourism development strategy in the city of Neyriz using strategic SOAR analysis. Journal of Geographical Research on Desert Areas. 6(1):51-74. [Persian] [Link] [DOI:10.29252/grd.2018.1237]
26. Sheikhi Chaman M (2020). The role of health tourism in boosting Iran's health economy. Journal of Health Administration. 23(2):9-10. [Persian] [Link] [DOI:10.29252/jha.23.2.9]
27. Vinyals-Mirabent S (2019). European urban destinations' attractors at the frontier between competitiveness and a unique destination image. A benchmark study of communication practices. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management. 12:37-45. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.jdmm.2019.02.006]