国家公园语境下森林公园游憩价值感知评估及优化——以马蹄寺森林公园为例
收稿日期: 2022-01-10
修回日期: 2022-03-28
网络出版日期: 2022-06-13
基金资助
国家社会科学基金项目“祁连山国家公园生态保护与游憩利用协调机制研究”(19BGL193)
Assessment and Optimization of Recreation Value Perception in Forest Parks in the Context of National Parks: A Case Study of Horseshoe Temple Forest Park
Received date: 2022-01-10
Revised date: 2022-03-28
Online published: 2022-06-13
两山理论指导下,游憩成为国家倡导的国家公园可持续利用方式之一,对游憩价值进行评估有利于优化国家公园游憩利用具体规划。将祁连山国家公园试点区内马蹄寺森林公园作为案例地,借鉴其他学者关于游憩价值的研究成果构建其游憩价值评估体系,来对森林公园游憩价值进行综合评估。对所构建的“马蹄寺森林公园游憩价值评价指标体系”准则层的5个价值因子(资源赋存游憩价值、生态系统游憩价值、交通网络游憩价值、基础设施游憩价值、公园管理游憩价值)进行感知评分,结果显示:马蹄寺森林公园生态系统游憩价值>资源赋存游憩价值>基础设施游憩价值>公园管理游憩价值,其值均处于3.5~5.0范围内,属正面性感知;交通网络游憩价值居于末位,为中立性感知。通过探讨分析,对5个方面的游憩价值提出相关建议,以期为国家公园游憩价值评估提供新的思路,为国家公园高质量发展提供有效策略。
李兰莉 , 杨阿莉 , 王纪云 . 国家公园语境下森林公园游憩价值感知评估及优化——以马蹄寺森林公园为例[J]. 林草资源研究, 2022 , 0(2) : 164 -171 . DOI: 10.13466/j.cnki.lyzygl.2022.02.022
Guided by the theory that lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets,recreation has become one of the sustainable utilization ways of national parks. The evaluation of recreation value is helpful to optimize the planning of recreation utilization of national parks and promote the construction of ecological civilization of national parks.Horseshoe Temple Forest Park in the pilot area of Qilian Mountain National Park was used as a case site,and its recreation value evaluation system was constructed by drawing on the research results of other scholars on recreation value,so as to comprehensively evaluate the recreation value of forest parks. The five value factors (the recreation value of resources endowment,the recreation value of ecosystem,the recreation value of transportation network,the recreation value of infrastructure,and the recreation value of park management) of the "Horseshoe Temple Forest Park Recreation Value Evaluation Index System" were perceptually scored,and the results showed that the recreation value of ecosystem> the recreation value of resources> the recreation value of infrastructure> the recreation value of park management.The recreation values of these aspects were in the range of 3.5 to 5.0,and all belonged to positive perception; the recreation value of transportation network was the lowest,which was a neutral perception. Through discussion and analysis,relevant suggestions were made on the recreation value in five aspects,in order to provide new ideas for the assessment of the recreation value of national parks and provide effective strategies for the high-quality development of national parks.
| [1] | 中共中央办公厅国务院办公厅印发《建立国家公园体制总体方案》[J]. 中华人民共和国国务院公报, 2017(29):7-11. |
| [2] | 陈鑫峰, 王剑波. 生态旅游与森林公园中开展生态旅游实践的探讨[J]. 世界林业研究, 2001(4):74-80. |
| [3] | Heyes C L, Heyes A. Recreational benefits from the Dartmoor National Park[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 1999, 55(2):69-80. |
| [4] | 任希. 旅游资源游憩价值评估研究综述[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报:社会科学版, 2014, 8(1):39-43. |
| [5] | Bultena G L, Taves M J. Changing wilderness images and forestry policy[J]. Journal of Forestry, 1961, 59(3):167-171. |
| [6] | Driver B L, Tocher S R. Toward a behavioral interpretation of recreational engagements with implications for planning[M]// Land and Leisure. London: Routledge, 2019:86-104. |
| [7] | Hu YingChun. The Application Research of Contingent Valuation Method in Urban Park[C]// Applied Mechanics and Materials. Switzerland: Trans Tech Publications Ltd, 2014, 448:4150-4153. |
| [8] | Gillespie R, Collins D, Bennett J. Adapting the travel cost method to estimate changes in recreation benefits in the Hawkesbury-Nepean River[J]. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, 24(4):375-391. |
| [9] | Kang Nannan, Wang Erda, Yu Yang. Valuing forest park attributes by giving consideration to the tourist satisfaction[J]. Tourism Economics, 2019, 25(5):711-733. |
| [10] | Shangi Z A D, Hasan M T, Ahmad M I. Rethinking Urban Waterfront as a Potential Public Open Space:Interpretative Framework of Surma Waterfront[J]. Architecture Research, 2020, 10(3):69-74. |
| [11] | 董雪旺, 张捷, 蔡永寿, 等. 基于旅行费用法的九寨沟旅游资源游憩价值评估[J]. 地域研究与开发, 2012, 31(5):78-84. |
| [12] | 何宣仪, 魏枝岐. 基于AITCM的游憩价值评估——以汉口江滩为例[J]. 中国管理信息化, 2014, 17(23):101-103. |
| [13] | 伍磊, 董朝阳, 马仁锋, 等. 景区游憩价值评估的ZTCIA模型及 其普陀山实证研究[J]. 宁波大学学报:理工版, 2016, 29(3):107-111. |
| [14] | 何爱红. 甘肃国家级自然保护区旅游资源的游憩价值评估[J]. 资源开发与市场, 2012, 28(12):1129-1130. |
| [15] | 王晋楠. 基于选择实验法的村镇景观游憩价值评估[D]. 北京: 北京林业大学, 2014. |
| [16] | 邴振华. 自然保护区景观服务及其价值评估研究[D]. 上海: 上海师范大学, 2013. |
| [17] | 王一晴, 陆明, 吴远翔, 等. 国内外游憩服务价值评估研究热点及趋势特征——基于知识图谱的文献计量分析[EB/OL]. 知网阅读, [2022-02-24]. https://mall.cnki.net/magazine/article/CPFD/ZHCG202109008030.htm . |
| [18] | 刘建国, 黄杏灵, 晋孟雨. 游客感知:国内外文献的回顾及展望[J]. 经济地理, 2017, 37(5):216-224. |
| [19] | 王莉, 张宏梅, 陆林, 等. 湿地公园游客感知价值研究——以西溪/溱湖为例[J]. 旅游学刊, 2014, 29(6):87-96. |
| [20] | 刘佳, 高峰, 张生瑞. 滨海旅游目的地游客感知价值的影响因素研究——以广西北海银滩国家级旅游度假区为例[J]. 中国生态旅游, 2021, 11(4):644-657. |
| [21] | 郭苏明, 冯美玲. 基于游客感知的乡村景观评价因子分析——以苏州市树山村为例[J]. 西北林学院学报, 2022, 37(1):253-258. |
| [22] | 亢楠楠. 国家森林公园游憩价值评价研究[D]. 大连: 大连理工大学, 2019. |
| [23] | 敬峰瑞, 孙虎. 基于游客视角的城市湿地公园游憩体验价值评价——以西安灞桥湿地公园为例[J]. 陕西师范大学学报:自然科学版, 2016, 44(3):110-117. |
| [24] | 李双容. “旅游凝视”视角下淮北市南湖国家湿地公园游憩价值感知评估[J]. 云南地理环境研究, 2020, 32(3):25-33. |
| [25] | Raymond C, Brown G. A Method for assessing protected area allocations using a typology of landscape values[J]. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 2006, 49(6):797-812. |
| [26] | 陈幺, 赵振斌, 张铖, 等. 遗址保护区乡村居民景观价值感知与态度评价——以汉长安城遗址保护区为例[J]. 地理研究, 2015, 34(10):1971-1980. |
| [27] | 李伯华, 杨家蕊, 刘沛林, 等. 传统村落景观价值居民感知与评价研究——以张谷英村为例[J]. 华中师范大学学报:自然科学版, 2018, 52(02):248-255. |
| [28] | 周璨. 舜皇山国家森林公园游憩资源价值评估研究[D]. 长沙: 湖南农业大学, 2018. |
| [29] | 张晓利, 马力, 鲁小珍, 顾叶, 阮宏华. 游憩价值评价方法探讨——以凤阳山自然保护区为例[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2011, 21(S1):213-216. |
| [30] | 缪雯纬. 城市湖泊资源价值评估与保护策略研究[D]. 武汉: 华中科技大学, 2019. |
| [31] | 邓宗敏. 森林游憩价值评估研究[D]. 雅安: 四川农业大学, 2017. |
| [32] | Tosun C. Host perceptions of impacts:A comparative tourism study[J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 2002, 29(1):231-253. |
| [33] | 郭洋, 杨飞龄, 王军军, 等. “三江并流”区游憩文化生态系统服务评价研究[J]. 生态学报, 2020, 40(13):4351-4361. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
