IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/mgrsod/v26y2022i1p42-51n5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Planning for Sustainable Development of Tourism in the Tatra National Park Buffer Zone Using the MCDA Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Adamczyk Joanna

    (Institute of Environmental Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland)

  • Wałdykowski Piotr

    (Institute of Environmental Engineering, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland)

Abstract

This study aims to develop practice guidelines for the preparation of local regulations promoting sustainable tourism planning for the area located at the entrance to the Tatra National Park, Poland. Included in the study was a set of tourism activities put forward by the local community. These activities were divided into two priorities: sustainable tourist activities (hiking and walking, cycling, horseback riding) and investments that would have an environmental impact (downhill skiing, recreational infrastructure, commerce, catering). The analysis criteria covered the tourist attractiveness of the area and its suitability for a given activity (benefit), as well as requirements concerning the protection of nature, topographical relief, landscape, and traditional land use (cost). These criteria were evaluated using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and summarized using the Weighted Linear Combination (WLC). The results showed the high attractiveness of the area for both priorities. However, due to the area's unique nature, investments having an environmental impact must be limited to the vicinity of the existing built-up areas. The use of MCDA supports decision-making at the local scale, significantly enhances the transparency of the results, and facilitates communication with local communities. The comparison with the current local law provisions showed the shortcomings of the methods used to date when preparing planning instruments.

Suggested Citation

  • Adamczyk Joanna & Wałdykowski Piotr, 2022. "Planning for Sustainable Development of Tourism in the Tatra National Park Buffer Zone Using the MCDA Approach," Miscellanea Geographica. Regional Studies on Development, Sciendo, vol. 26(1), pages 42-51, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:mgrsod:v:26:y:2022:i:1:p:42-51:n:5
    DOI: 10.2478/mgrsd-2020-0067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/mgrsd-2020-0067
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/mgrsd-2020-0067?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin Weber & Franz Eisenführ & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 1988. "The Effects of Splitting Attributes on Weights in Multiattribute Utility Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 431-445, April.
    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. Craig R. Fox & Robert T. Clemen, 2005. "Subjective Probability Assessment in Decision Analysis: Partition Dependence and Bias Toward the Ignorance Prior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(9), pages 1417-1432, September.
    2. Lai, Po‐Lin & Potter, Andrew & Beynon, Malcolm & Beresford, Anthony, 2015. "Evaluating the efficiency performance of airports using an integrated AHP/DEA-AR technique," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 75-85.
    3. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köster, Mats, 2015. "Violations of first-order stochastic dominance as salience effects," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 42-46.
    4. Lahtinen, Tuomas J. & Hämäläinen, Raimo P., 2016. "Path dependence and biases in the even swaps decision analysis method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(3), pages 890-898.
    5. David A. Hensher, 2006. "How do respondents process stated choice experiments? Attribute consideration under varying information load," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 861-878, September.
    6. Steven J. Humphrey & Luke Lindsay & Chris Starmer, 2017. "Consumption experience, choice experience and the endowment effect," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 3(2), pages 109-120, December.
    7. Francesco Galioto & Chiara Paffarini & Massimo Chiorri & Biancamaria Torquati & Lucio Cecchini, 2017. "Economic, Environmental, and Animal Welfare Performance on Livestock Farms: Conceptual Model and Application to Some Case Studies in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Doyle, J. R. & Arthurs, A. J. & Green, R. H. & McAulay, L. & Pitt, M. R. & Bottomley, P. A. & Evans, W., 1996. "The judge, the model of the judge, and the model of the judged as judge: Analyses of the UK 1992 research assessment exercise data for business and management studies," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 13-28, February.
    9. Mustajoki, Jyri, 2012. "Effects of imprecise weighting in hierarchical preference programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(1), pages 193-201.
    10. Michael H. Birnbaum & Ulrich Schmidt & Miriam D. Schneider, 2017. "Testing independence conditions in the presence of errors and splitting effects," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 61-85, February.
    11. John C. Butler & James S. Dyer & Jianmin Jia, 2006. "Using Attributes to Predict Objectives in Preference Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 100-116, June.
    12. Yan Sun & Shu Li & Nicolao Bonini & Yang Liu, 2016. "Effect of Graph Scale on Risky Choice: Evidence from Preference and Process in Decision-Making," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, January.
    13. Strager, Michael P. & Rosenberger, Randall S., 2006. "Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(4), pages 627-639, June.
    14. Bengart, Paul & Vogt, Bodo, 2021. "Fuel mix disclosure in Germany—The effect of more transparent information on consumer preferences for renewable energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    15. Rosa Marina González & Concepción Román & Francisco Javier Amador & Luis Ignacio Rizzi & Juan de Dios Ortúzar & Raquel Espino & Juan Carlos Martín & Elisabetta Cherchi, 2018. "Estimating the value of risk reductions for car drivers when pedestrians are involved: a case study in Spain," Transportation, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 499-521, March.
    16. Tavana, Madjid & Di Caprio, Debora, 2016. "Modeling synergies in multi-criteria supplier selection and order allocation: An application to commodity tradingAuthor-Name: Sodenkamp, Mariya A," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 254(3), pages 859-874.
    17. Butler, John C. & Dyer, James S. & Jia, Jianmin & Tomak, Kerem, 2008. "Enabling e-transactions with multi-attribute preference models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 748-765, April.
    18. Marttunen, Mika & Haag, Fridolin & Belton, Valerie & Mustajoki, Jyri & Lienert, Judit, 2019. "Methods to inform the development of concise objectives hierarchies in multi-criteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 277(2), pages 604-620.
    19. Montibeller, Gilberto & Franco, Alberto & Lord, Ewan & Iglesias, Aline, 2008. "Structuring multi-criteria portfolio analysis models," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 22693, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    20. Marttunen, Mika & Hamalainen, Raimo P., 1995. "Decision analysis interviews in environmental impact assessment," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 551-563, December.

    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:vrs:mgrsod:v:26:y:2022:i:1:p:42-51:n:5. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.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.