IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i19p7967-d419864.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forest Tourism and Recreation Management in the Polish Bieszczady Mountains in the Opinion of Tourist Guides

Author

Listed:
  • Emilia Janeczko

    (Department of Forest Utilization, Institute of Forest Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska 159, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Joanna Pniewska

    (Department of Forest Utilization, Institute of Forest Sciences, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska 159, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Ernest Bielinis

    (Department of Forestry and Forest Ecology, Faculty of Environmental Management and Agriculture, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Pl. Łódzki 2, 10-727 Olsztyn, Poland)

Abstract

This article presents results of research carried out in 2018 that aimed to determine the opinions of Bieszczady mountain guides on the scope of development of tourism and recreational infrastructure in the Bieszczady forests, Poland. The online survey included questions regarding nature protection in the Bieszczady region, factors limiting opportunities for tourism and recreation development in the Bieszczady forests, and the needs regarding new elements of tourism and recreation management of the area. Our research results indicate that the greatest impediments to the recreational use of the forest result from temporary restrictions on forest access, which are related to hunting or forest-management works. Most the interviewed guides were against further development of the tourist and recreational infrastructure in the Bieszczady forests. They were also in favor of extending the nature protection area in Bieszczady. Statistical analyses using the Kruskal–Wallis test showed that persons who are against, in favor of and neutral on extending the nature protection area in the Bieszczady forests varied significantly in their views on issues such as hunting or restrictions on forest access related to forest-management works. Compared to the other respondents, the supporters of extending the range of protected areas were more frequently against designating new recreation spaces or bonfire places in the Bieszczady forests.

Suggested Citation

  • Emilia Janeczko & Joanna Pniewska & Ernest Bielinis, 2020. "Forest Tourism and Recreation Management in the Polish Bieszczady Mountains in the Opinion of Tourist Guides," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-17, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:19:p:7967-:d:419864
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/19/7967/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/19/7967/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jitka Fialová & David Březina & Nikola Žižlavská & Jakub Michal & Ivo Machar, 2019. "Assessment of Visitor Preferences and Attendance to Singletrails in the Moravian Karst for the Sustainable Development Proposals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-20, June.
    2. Mauricio Carvache-Franco & Marival Segarra-Oña & Conrado Carrascosa-López, 2019. "Segmentation by Motivation in Ecotourism: Application to Protected Areas in Guayas, Ecuador," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Giergiczny, Marek & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Żylicz, Tomasz & Angelstam, Per, 2015. "Choice experiment assessment of public preferences for forest structural attributes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 8-23.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ahmed Nuru Zeleke & Tuğba Deniz, 2023. "The Impact of Visitor Profile on Effective Management of Protected Areas: A Case of Atatürk Arboretum," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-11, March.
    2. Bohwi Lee, 2021. "Perception and Prioritization of Ecosystem Services from Bamboo Forest in Lao PDR: Case Study of Sangthong District," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-13, November.

    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. Frings, Oliver & Abildtrup, Jens & Montagné-Huck, Claire & Gorel, Salomé & Stenger, Anne, 2023. "Do individual PES buyers care about additionality and free-riding? A choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    2. Sagebiel, Julian & Glenk, Klaus & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "Spatially explicit demand for afforestation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 190-199.
    3. Georgică Gheorghe & Petronela Tudorache & Ioan Mihai Roşca, 2023. "The Contribution of Green Marketing in the Development of a Sustainable Destination through Advanced Clustering Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-24, September.
    4. Agimass, Fitalew & Lundhede, Thomas & Panduro, Toke Emil & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "The choice of forest site for recreation: A revealed preference analysis using spatial data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 445-454.
    5. Kim, Do-hun & Sjølie, Hanne K. & Aguilar, Francisco X., 2024. "Psychological distances to climate change and public preferences for biodiversity-augmenting attributes in family-owned production forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    6. Peeter Vassiljev & Simon Bell, 2023. "While Experiencing a Forest Trail, Variation in Landscape Is Just as Important as Content: A Virtual Reality Experiment of Cross-Country Skiing in Estonia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, February.
    7. Tagliafierro, C. & Boeri, M. & Longo, A. & Hutchinson, W.G., 2016. "Stated preference methods and landscape ecology indicators: An example of transdisciplinarity in landscape economic valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 11-22.
    8. Nannan Kang & Erda Wang & Yang Yu, 2019. "Valuing forest park attributes by giving consideration to the tourist satisfaction," Tourism Economics, , vol. 25(5), pages 711-733, August.
    9. Weller, Priska & Elsasser, Peter, 2018. "Preferences for forest structural attributes in Germany – Evidence from a choice experiment," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-9.
    10. Martínez-Jauregui, María & White, Piran C.L. & Touza, Julia & Soliño, Mario, 2019. "Untangling perceptions around indicators for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Stanislava Pachrová & Petr Chalupa & Eva Janoušková & Alice Šedivá Neckáøová & Leoš Štefka, 2020. "Monitoring of Visitors as a Tool of Protected Areas Management," Academica Turistica - Tourism and Innovation Journal, University of Primorska Press, vol. 13(1), pages 67-79.
    12. Aneta Parsonsova & Ivo Machar, 2021. "National Limits of Sustainability: The Czech Republic’s CO 2 Emissions in the Perspective of Planetary Boundaries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-16, February.
    13. Mauricio Carvache-Franco & Conrado Carrascosa-López & Wilmer Carvache-Franco, 2022. "Market Segmentation by Motivations in Ecotourism: Application in the Posets-Maladeta Natural Park, Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-18, April.
    14. Linjia Wu & Qidi Dong & Shixian Luo & Wenyuan Jiang & Ming Hao & Qibing Chen, 2021. "Effects of Spatial Elements of Urban Landscape Forests on the Restoration Potential and Preference of Adolescents," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    15. Castillo-Eguskitza, Nekane & Hoyos, David & Onaindia, Miren & Czajkowski, Mikolaj, 2019. "Unraveling local preferences and willingness to pay for different management scenarios: A choice experiment to biosphere reserve management," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    16. Héctor Tavárez & Alicia Barriga, 2023. "Economic Viability of Developing Passive Recreational Opportunities in Puerto Rico: Insights for Sustainable Forest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-17, October.
    17. Azdren Doli & Dastan Bamwesigye & Petra Hlaváčková & Jitka Fialová & Petr Kupec & Obed Asamoah, 2021. "Forest Park Visitors Opinions and Willingness to Pay for Sustainable Development of the Germia Forest and Recreational Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    18. Mariel, Petr & Artabe, Alaitz, 2020. "Interpreting correlated random parameters in choice experiments," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    19. Tavárez, Héctor & Elbakidze, Levan, 2019. "Valuing recreational enhancements in the San Patricio Urban Forest of Puerto Rico: A choice experiment approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    20. Gianluca Grilli & John Curtis & Stephen Hynes, 2020. "Modelling anglers' fish release choices using logbook data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 206-219, April.

    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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:19:p:7967-:d:419864. 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.