IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i12p2119-d1538547.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating Scientific Tourism of Geoheritage: An Empirical Study of Fangshan Global Geopark in Beijing

Author

Listed:
  • Zehui Zhu

    (Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Jiaming Liu

    (Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • He Zhu

    (Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

  • Wudong Zhao

    (Key Laboratory of Regional Sustainable Development Modeling, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
    College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China)

Abstract

Scientific tourism (ScT) of geoheritage serves as a crucial approach to ensuring the protection of natural heritage. Establishing a comprehensive evaluation system to guide the exploration of ScT in geoheritage is essential. This study adheres to principles of comprehensiveness by integrating both qualitative and quantitative methods, ensuring operability, authenticity, and scientific rigor. It employs the analytic hierarchy process, expert consultation method, and fuzzy mathematical evaluation method to construct an evaluation index system. This system encompasses four dimensions: ScT of geoheritage resources, practices and construction related to ScT, auxiliary conditions for exploration, and ecological environment construction. The study uses Fangshan Global Geopark in Beijing as a case study for empirical analysis. The findings indicate that the constructed evaluation system effectively captures key factors influencing the exploration of the ScT of geoheritage. Fangshan Global Geopark demonstrates commendable performance in terms of its ScT of geoheritage resources as well as practices and construction. But it has limitations regarding auxiliary conditions for exploration and ecological environment construction. This study provides theoretical underpinnings and policy recommendations for the exploration of the ScT of geoheritage.

Suggested Citation

  • Zehui Zhu & Jiaming Liu & He Zhu & Wudong Zhao, 2024. "Evaluating Scientific Tourism of Geoheritage: An Empirical Study of Fangshan Global Geopark in Beijing," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:12:p:2119-:d:1538547
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/12/2119/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/12/2119/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas L. Saaty, 1986. "Axiomatic Foundation of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 841-855, July.
    2. Getaneh Addis Tessema & Jean Poesen & Gert Verstraeten & Anton Van Rompaey & Jan van der Borg, 2021. "The Scenic Beauty of Geosites and Its Relation to Their Scientific Value and Geoscience Knowledge of Tourists: A Case Study from Southeastern Spain," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-27, April.
    3. Vaidya, Omkarprasad S. & Kumar, Sushil, 2006. "Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 1-29, February.
    4. Ľubomír Štrba & Andrea Vravcová & Michaela Podoláková & Lenka Varcholová & Branislav Kršák, 2023. "Linking Geoheritage or Geosite Assessment Results with Geotourism Potential and Development: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-20, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wenshuai Wu & Gang Kou, 2016. "A group consensus model for evaluating real estate investment alternatives," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Gopalakrishnan Suresh & Vadakkapaikkadu Ravindran Renjith & Anchalassery Balakrishnan Bhasi, 2024. "Prioritisation of operations during emergency shutdown of a crude distillation unit by interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 238(5), pages 1023-1036, October.
    3. de Luca, Stefano, 2014. "Public engagement in strategic transportation planning: An analytic hierarchy process based approach," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 110-124.
    4. Garbuzova-Schlifter, Maria & Madlener, Reinhard, 2016. "AHP-based risk analysis of energy performance contracting projects in Russia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 559-581.
    5. Mehmet Yüksel, 2019. "A Model Proposal for the Evaluation of Chemistry Education in the Context of Learning Environment," Asian Journal of Education and Training, Asian Online Journal Publishing Group, vol. 5(3), pages 488-494.
    6. Bernasconi, Michele & Choirat, Christine & Seri, Raffaello, 2014. "Empirical properties of group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: Theory and evidence," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 232(3), pages 584-592.
    7. Peng Sun & Jiawei Yang & Yongfeng Zhi, 2019. "Multi-attribute decision-making method based on Taylor expansion," International Journal of Distributed Sensor Networks, , vol. 15(3), pages 15501477198, March.
    8. Singh, Rana Pratap & Nachtnebel, Hans Peter, 2016. "Analytical hierarchy process (AHP) application for reinforcement of hydropower strategy in Nepal," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 43-58.
    9. Wolfgang Ossadnik & Stefanie Schinke & Ralf H. Kaspar, 2016. "Group Aggregation Techniques for Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Network Process: A Comparative Analysis," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 421-457, March.
    10. Nakagawa, Yoshinori & Nasu, Seigo & Saito, Taiki & Yamaguchi, Nobuyoshi, 2010. "Analytic hierarchy based policy design method (AHPo) for solving societal problems that require a multifaceted approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(3), pages 1545-1553, December.
    11. Maina, Joseph & Venus, Valentijn & McClanahan, Timothy R. & Ateweberhan, Mebrahtu, 2008. "Modelling susceptibility of coral reefs to environmental stress using remote sensing data and GIS models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 212(3), pages 180-199.
    12. Jochen Wulf, 2020. "Development of an AHP hierarchy for managing omnichannel capabilities: a design science research approach," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(1), pages 39-68, April.
    13. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    14. Guh, Yuh-Yuan, 1997. "Introduction to a new weighting method -- Hierarchy consistency analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 215-226, October.
    15. Nina Almasifar & Tülay Özdemir Canbolat & Milad Akhavan & Roberto Alonso González-Lezcano, 2021. "Proposing a New Methodology for Monument Conservation “SCOPE MANAGEMENT” by the Use of an Analytic Hierarchy Process Project Management Institute System and the ICOMOS Burra Charter," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-13, November.
    16. Jitendar Kumar Khatri & Bhimaraya Metri, 2016. "SWOT-AHP Approach for Sustainable Manufacturing Strategy Selection: A Case of Indian SME," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 17(5), pages 1211-1226, October.
    17. Cui, Ye & E, Hanyu & Pedrycz, Witold & Fayek, Aminah Robinson, 2022. "A granular multicriteria group decision making for renewable energy planning problems," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1047-1059.
    18. Xiaoxia Li, 2022. "Research on the Development Level of Rural E-Commerce in China Based on Analytic Hierarchy and Systematic Clustering Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-18, July.
    19. Sushil, 2019. "Efficient interpretive ranking process incorporating implicit and transitive dominance relationships," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 1489-1516, December.
    20. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:12:p:2119-:d:1538547. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.