Relationship between place attachment and user satisfaction at some national parks in Turkey

Environmental and natural preservation has become a common problem for all societies of this century. Much scientific research is being done and many methods are being devised to analyze the balance between the recreational use and preservation of natural spaces. It appears that the basic purpose of these methods is to achieve recreational satisfaction. User satisfaction is a concept that lies at the core of many sectors and work areas. Place attachment is another concept that has been covered in many research studies conducted until today. Place attachment is a concept that is closely related with satisfaction and includes symbolic and emotional expressions. To see which factors effect visitor satisfaction and attachment will benefit future studies in national parks. In this scope, 5 national parks in Marmara region with different characteristics and highest user density rates have been chosen. The questionnaire forms have been accordingly designed to identify tendencies and evaluate attachment and satisfaction degrees with suitable analysis techniques. The first objective was to identify overall satisfaction and attachment levels and ratings. It was found that the visitors were satisfied with their overall visiting experience and also found that the attachment of the visitors to national parks was high. We observed that as the overall satisfaction increases, the overall attachment increases, as well. Second objective was to determine place attachment and its sub-categories. As a result of the analyses, 4 sub-factors with high reliability values obtained

PDF

___

Akama, ].S. and Kieti, D.M., (2003). Measuring tourist satisfaction with Kenya’s wildlife safari: case study of Tsavo West National Park. Tourism Management, 24, 73-81.

Berkoz, L., Türk, S.S., Kellekçi, Ö. L. (2009) Environmental Quality and User Satisfaction in Mass Housing Areas: The Case of Istanbul, European Planning Studies, Vol. 17, No: 1, pp. 161—174.

Bricker, K.S., and Kerstetter, D., (2000). Level of specialization and place attachment: An exploratory study of whitewater recreationists. Leisure Sciences, 11, 233-257.

Eisenhauer, B. W, Krannich, R. S., and Blahna, D. ]., (2000). Attachments to special places on public lands: An analysis of activities, reason for attachments, and community connections. Society 29* Natural Resources, 13, 421— 441.

Halpenny, E., (2006) Ph.D. Environ— mental Behaviour, Place attachment and park visitation: case study of visitors to Point Pelee National Park (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).

University of Waterloo, Canada. Hammit, E., Backlund, E. A. and Bixler, R. D., (2006). Place bonding for recreation places: Conceptual and empirical development. Leisure Studies, 25, 17-41.

Hammit, E., Kyle, G. T., and Oh, C., (2009). Comparison of Place Bonding Models in Recreation Resource Management. [ournal of Leisure Research, Vol. 41, No.1, 55-70.

Hidalgo, CM. and Hernandez B., (2001). Place Attachment: Conceptual and Empirical Questions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 273 -281. Hwang, S-N. and Lee, C., C, H-].,

(2005). The relationship among tour— ists’ involvement, place attatchment and interpretation satisfaction in Taiwan’s national parks. Tourism Management, 26, 143—156.

]orgensen, B. S., and Stedman, R. C., (2001). Sense of place as an attitude: Lakeshore owners attitudes toward their properties. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21, 233-248.

]orgensen, B. S., and Stedman, R. C., (2006). comparative analysis of pre— dictors of sense of place dimensions: Attachment to, dependence on, and identification with lakeshore proper— ties. ]ournal of Environmental Management, 79, 316-327.

Kaltenborn, B. P. (1998). Effects of sense of place on responses to en— vironmental impacts: study among residents in Svalbard in the Norwegian high Arctic. Applied Geography, 18(2), 169—189.

Kaltenborn, B.P., and Williams D.R., (2002). The meaning of place: Attach— ments to Femundsmarka National Park, Norway, among tourists and lo— cals, Nork Geografik Tidsskrift Norwegian [ournal of Geography, 56:3, 189- 198.

Kyle, G., Absher, ].D. and Graefe, A. R., (2003). The moderating role of place attachment on the relationship between attitude towards fees and spending preferences. Leisure Sciences, 25, 33-50.

Kyle, G., Bricker, K., Graefe, A., and Wickham, T., (2004a). An examination of recreationists’ relationships with activities and settings. Leisure Sciences, 26, 123-142.

Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., and Bacon, ]., (2004b). Effects of place attachment on users’ perceptions of social and environmental conditions in natural setting. ]ournal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 213-225.

Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., and Bacon, ]., (2004c). Predictors of behavior loyalty among hikers along the Appalachian Trail. Leisure Sciences, 26, 99—118

Kyle, G. T., Mowen, A. ]., and Tarrant, M. A., (2004d). Linking place preferences with place meaning: An examination of the relationship between place motivation and place attachment. ]ournal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 439-454.

Low, S. M., and Altman, I., (1992). Place Attachment: Conceptual Inqui— ry. In I. Altman S. M. Low (Eds.), Place Attachment (pp. 1—13). New York: Plenum Press.

Manning, R. E., (1999). Studies in outdoor recreation: Search and research for satisfaction. (2 ed.). Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press.

Mesch, G. S., and Manor, O., (1998). Social ties, environmental perception, and local attachment. Environment and Behavior, 30(4), 504-519.

Morgan, P, (2010). Towards developmental theory of place attachment. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 11-12.

Pretty, G. H., Chipuer, H. M. and Bramston, P., (2003). Sense of place amongst adolescents and adults in two rural Australian towns: The discrim— inating features of place attachment, sense of community and place dependence in relation to place identity. ]our— nal ofEnvironmental Psychology, 23(3), 273—287.

Proshansky, H. M., (1978). The city and self-identity. Environment and Be— havior, 10(2), 147-169.

Relph, E., (1976). Place and place— lessness. London: Pion Limited. Sıvalıoğlu, P. and Berköz, L. (2012a) User Satisfaction in national parks, Academic Research InternationaL'VoLZ(3),h4my2012,pp.537-548. Sıvalıoğlu, P. and Berköz, L. (2012b) 181

Perceptual evaluation of the national park users, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 50 (2012) 928 940.

Stedman, R. C., (2002). Toward social psychology of place: Predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitude and identity. Environment and Behavior, 34(5), 561- 581.

Stedman, R. C. (2003). Is it really just social construction?: The contribution of the physical environment to sense of place. Society and Natural Resources, 16, 671-685.

Stokols, D., and Shumaker, S. A., (1981). People in places: transactional view of settings. In ]. H. Harvey (Ed.), Cognition, social behavior, and the environment. (pp. 441- 488). Hillsdale, N]: Erlbaum.

Tuan, Y. P., (1977). Space and Place: 'lhe perspective of experience. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Warzecha, C.,A., and Lime, D., W, (2001). Place Attachment in Canyon— lands National Park: Visitors’ Assessment of Setting Attributes on the C010- rado and Green Rivers, ]ournal of Park and Recreation Administration, 19, 1, 59-78

Williams, D. R., Patterson, M. E., Roggenbuck, ]. R., and Watson, A. E., (1992). The variability of user-based social impact standards for wilderness management. Forest Science, 14, 29-46.

Williams, D. R., and Stewart, S. I., (1998). Sense of place: An elusive concept that is finding home in ecosystem management. Journal of Forestry, 96(5),18-23.

Williams, DR. and Roggenbuck, ]. W, (1989). Measuring place attachment: Some preliminary results. Paper presented at the session on Outdoor Planning and Management, NRPS Symposium on Leisure Research, San Antonio, Texas.

Williams, D. R., and Vaske, ]. ]., (2003). The measurement of place attachment: Validity and generalizability of psychometric approach. Forest Science, 49(6), 830-840.