Ekoturizm Alan Uygunluğu Analizinde CBS Teknolojisi Kulanımının Yeterliliği Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Son yıllarda, ekoturizm gelişimi için uygun alanları belirlemeye yönelik çalışmalarda Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri (CBS) teknolojisinin yaygın olarak kullanıldığı görülmektedir. CBS teknolojisi, sayısallaştırılmış veri kullanarak sistematik ve kapsamlı bir analiz sunan güçlü bir yaklaşımdır. Araştırmacılar topoğrafya, arazi örtüsü, iklim, sosyokültürel yapı vb. bileşenlere sayısal değerler vermek suretiyle yaygın yöntemler oluşturmaya çalışmaktadır. Fakat araştırmaların çoğunun vaka çalışması şeklinde olması, her çalışmada alana özgü değerlemeler yapılması ve bazı niteliklerin sayısal olarak ifade edilme güçlüğü, ortak yöntemler ortaya koymayı zorlaştırmaktadır. Bu araştırmada CBS araçları ile yapılan alan uygunluğu analizlerinin farklı aşamalarında kullanılan çeşitli yöntem ve yaklaşımların sonuçlar üzerindeki etkileri incelenmiştir. Sonuçların CBS’ye eşlik eden Çok Kriterli Karar Verme (ÇKKV) tekniklerine, analizde kullanılan kriterlerin seçimine ve bunlara ağırlık tayin etme yöntemlerine, kriterlerin nasıl standardize edildiğine ve sonuç haritasının yorumlanmasını sağlayan uygunluk analizi türlerine göre değiştiği görülmektedir. Özellikle sosyokültürel bileşenlerin sayısal olarak ifade edilme zorluğu ve çeşitliliği, CBS ile yapılan nicel değerlendirmenin yanında nitel değerlendirmenin de gerekli olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bunun yanısıra ekoturizm uygunluk seviyelerinin belirlenmesinde kullanılan Doğal Kırılmalar Yöntemi, Eşit Aralık Yöntemi ve FAO (Gıda ve Tarım Örgütü) Arazi Sınıflandırması, analiz haritasında farklı desenler oluşturmaktadır. Sonuç olarak CBS teknolojisi, bu alanda ortak ve yaygın yöntemler oluşturmak için tek başına yeterli değildir ve çalışma alanı ile planlanan faaliyete özgü değerlendirmelerle desteklenmesi gerekmektedir.

A Research on the Sufficiency of Using GIS Technology in Ecotourism Land Suitability Analysis

In recent years, it has been observed that Geographical Information Systems (GIS) technology is widely used in studies to determine suitable areas for ecotourism development. GIS technology is a powerful approach that offers a systematic and comprehensive analysis using digitized data. Researchers try to create common methods by giving numerical values to components such as topography, land cover, climate, sociocultural structure, etc. However, the fact that most of the studies are in the form of case studies, land-specific evaluations in each study and the difficulty of expressing some qualities numerically make it difficult to reveal common methods. In this study, the effects of various methods and approaches used in different stages of land suitability analysis performed with GIS tools on the results were examined. It is seen that the results vary according to the Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) techniques accompanying GIS, the selection of the criteria used in the analysis and the methods of assigning weight to them, how the criteria are standardized and the types of suitability analysis that enable the interpretation of the result map. In particular, the difficulty and diversity of expressing sociocultural components numerically reveals that qualitative evaluation is also necessary besides quantitative evaluation with GIS. In addition, the Natural Breaks Method, Equal Interval Classification and FAO's (Food and Agriculture Organization) Land Classification, which are used to determine the ecotourism suitability levels, create different patterns on the analysis map. As a result, GIS technology alone is not enough to create common and prevalent methods in this field and it needs to be supported by evaluations specific to the field of study and the planned activity.

PDF

___

Akpınar Külekçi E, Koç A. 2020. Analysis of the areas suitable for ecotourism using Geographical Information Systems: Example of Narman District (Erzurum) Turkey. Journal of Environmental Biology, 41 (2): 293-301. doi: http://www.dicle.edu.tr/Dosya/2020-06/dr.ogr_8435.PDF
Aliani H, BabaieKafaky S, Saffari A, Monavari SM. 2017. Land evaluation for ecotourism development - an integrated approach based on FUZZY, WLC, and ANP methods. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 14 (9): 1999-2008. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007 /s13762-017-1291-5
Arsić S, Nikolić D, Živković Ž. 2017. Hybrid SWOT-ANPFANP model for prioritization strategies of sustainable development of ecotourism in National Park Djerdap, Serbia. Forest Policy and Economics, 80: 11-26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.02.003
Backman S, Petrick J, Wright B. 2001. Management tools and techniques: an integrated approach to planning. In: Weaver DB (editor). The Encyclopedia of Ecotourism. London, UK: CABI Publishing. pp. 451-462. ISBN: 0-85199-368-0.
Bali A, Monovari SM, Riazi B, Khorasani N, Zarkesh MMK. 2015. A spatial decision support system for ecotourism development in Caspian Hyrcanian mixed forests ecoregion. Boletim de Ciências Geodésicas, 21 (2): 340-353. doi: https://doi.org/10.1590/S1982-21702015000200001
Biglarfadafan M, Danehkar A, Pourebrahim S, Shabani AA, Moeinaddini M. 2016. Application of strategic fuzzy assessment for environmental planning; case of bird watch zoning in wetlands. Open Journal of Geology, 6 (11): 1380. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojg.2016.611099
Bo L,Zhang F, Zhang L-W, Huang J-F, Zhi-Feng J, Gupta DK. 2012. Comprehensive suitability evaluation of tea crops using GIS and a modified land ecological suitability evaluation model. Pedosphere, 22 (1): 122-130. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/ S1002-0160(11)60198-7
Buckley R. 2000. Tourism in the most fragile environments. Tourism Recreation Research, 25 (1): 31-40. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2000.11014898
Bunruamkaew K, Murayam Y. 2011. Site suitability evaluation for ecotourism using GIS & AHP: A case study of Surat Thani province, Thailand. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 21: 269-278. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.07.024
Ceballos-Lascurain H. 1993. Ecotourism as a worldwide phenomenon. In: Lindberg K, Hawkins DE (editors). Ecotourism: a guide for planners and managers. North Bennington, VT: Ecotourism Society. pp. 12-14. ISBN: 0963633104.
Cini F, Metastasio R, Passafaro P, Saayman M, Merwe Pvd. 2017. Youth and Ecotourism: A Road Trip Towards the Future Sustainability of Natural Areas. In: Price RH (editor). Ecotourism and Sustainable Tourism: Management, Opportunities and Challenges. NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc. pp. 1-28. ISBN: 978-1-53610-799-9.
Cobbinah PB. 2015. Contextualising the meaning of ecotourism. Tourism Management Perspectives, 16: 179-189. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2015.07.015
Courvisanos J, Jain A. 2006. A framework for sustainable ecotourism: Application to Costa Rica. Tourism and Hospitality Planning & Development, 3 (2): 131-142. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14790530600938378
Dhami I, Deng J, Burns RC, Pierskalla C. 2014. Identifying and mapping forest-based ecotourism areas in West Virginia– Incorporating visitors' preferences. Tourism Management, 42: 165-176. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.11.007
Donohoe HM, Needham RD. 2006. Ecotourism: The evolving contemporary definition. Journal of Ecotourism, 5 (3): 192- 210. doi: https://doi.org/10.2167/joe152.0
Drumm A, Moore A, Soles A, Patterson C, Terborgh JE. 2004. The Business of Ecotourism Management and Development. Arlington, Virginia, USA: The Nature Conservancy. ISBN: 1-886765-16-2.
Du X, Wang Z. 2018. Optimizing monitoring locations using a combination of GIS and fuzzy multi criteria decision analysis, a case study from the Tomur World Natural Heritage site. Journal for Nature Conservation, 43: 67-74. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2018.02.004
FAO. 1976. (Food and Agriculture Organization) A framework for land evaluation. Soil Bulletin No 32i http://www.fao.org/3/x5310e/x5310e04.htm#chapter%203: %20land%20suitability%20classifications. [Erişim Tarihi: 12 Ocak 2019]
Fennell D. 2003. Ecotourism. USA, Canada: Routledge. ISBN: 1134087330.
Fung T, Wong F-K. 2007. Ecotourism planning using multiple criteria evaluation with GIS. Geocarto International, 22 (2): 87-105. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10106040701207332
Ghamgosar M, Haghyghy M, Mehrdoust F, Arshad N. 2011. Multicriteria decision making based on analytical hierarchy process (AHP) in GIS for tourism. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research, 10 (4): 501-507. doi: https://www.idosi.org/mejsr/mejsr10(4)11/14.pdf
Gigović L, Pamučar D, Lukić D, Marković S. 2016. GIS-Fuzzy DEMATEL MCDA model for the evaluation of the sites for ecotourism development: A case study of “Dunavski ključ” region, Serbia. Land Use Policy, 58 (2016): 348-365. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.07.030
Goodwin H. 1996. In pursuit of ecotourism. Biodiversity & Conservation, 5 (3): 277-291. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF00051774
Gourabi BR, Rad TG. 2013. The analysis of ecotourism potential in Boujagh wetland with AHP method. Life Science Journal, 10 (2s): 251-258. doi: http://www.lifesciencesite.com/lsj/ life1002s/044_15083life1002s_251_258.pdf
Hill J, Gale T. 2009. Ecotourism and Environmental Sustainability: An Introduction. In: Hill J, Gale T (editors). Ecotourism and Environmental Sustainability: Principles and Practice. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. pp. 3-16. ISBN: 075467262X.
Jeong JS, García-Moruno L, Hernández-Blanco J, JaraízCabanillas FJ. 2014. An operational method to supporting siting decisions for sustainable rural second home planning in ecotourism sites. Land Use Policy, 41: 550-560. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.04.012
Jhariya D, Kumar T, Gobinath M, Diwan P, Kishore N. 2016. Assessment of groundwater potential zone using remote sensing, GIS and multi criteria decision analysis techniques. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 88 (4): 481-492. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-016-0511-9
Jozi S, Majd NM. 2015. Ecological land capability evaluation of Dehloran county in order to ecotourism development. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 43 (3): 571-581. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12524-014-0427-z
Kaptan Ayhan Ç, Cengiz Taşlı T, Özkök F, Tatlı H. 2020. Land use suitability analysis of rural tourism activities: Yenice, Turkey. Tourism Management, 76 (2020): 1-11. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.07.003
Kiper T, Uzun O, Üstün Topal T. 2018. Rural Development Oriented Ecotourism Planning on Catchment Basin Scale: The Case of Pabuçdere and Kazandere Catchment Basin. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 19 (2017): 293-305. doi: https://jast.modares.ac.ir/article-23-454-en.pdf
Kumari S, Behera M, Tewari H. 2010. Identification of potential ecotourism sites in West District, Sikkim using geospatial tools. Tropical Ecology, 51 (1): 75-85. doi: http://www.tropecol.com/pdf/open/PDF_51_1/Jour.09.pdf
Laarman JG, Durst PB. 1987. Nature Travel and Tropical Forests. North Carolina: Southeastern Center for Forest Economics Research.
Mahdavi A, Niknejad M. 2014. Site suitability evaluation for ecotourism using MCDM methods and GIS: Case studyLorestan province, Iran. Journal of Biodiversity and Environmental Sciences, 4 (6): 425-437.
Miller ML, Kaae BC. 1993. Coastal and marine ecotourism: a formula for sustainable development. Trends, 30 (2): 35-41.
Nahuelhual L, Carmona A, Lozada P, Jaramillo A, Aguayo M. 2013. Mapping recreation and ecotourism as a cultural ecosystem service: An application at the local level in Southern Chile. Applied Geography, 40 (2013): 71-82. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2012.12.004
Nino K, Mamo Y, Mengesha G, Kibret KS. 2017. GIS based ecotourism potential assessment in Munessa Shashemene Concession Forest and its surrounding area, Ethiopia. Applied Geography, 82 (2017): 48-58. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.02.010
Orams M. 2001. Types of Ecotourism. In: Weaver DB (editor). The encyclopedia of ecotourism. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing. pp. 23-36. ISBN: 0-85199-368-0.
Ross S, Wall G. 1999. Ecotourism: towards congruence between theory and practice. Tourism Management, 20 (1): 123-132. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(98)00098-3
Saayman M. 2009. Ecotourism: getting back to basics. South Africa: Institute for Tourism and Leisure Studies, North-West University. ISBN: 1-86822-546-1.
Sahani N. 2019. Application of analytical hierarchy process and GIS for ecotourism potentiality mapping in Kullu District, Himachal Pradesh, India. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 22 (2020): 6187-6211. doi: https://doi.org/ 10.1007/ s10668-019-00470-w
Şakar D, Aydin A, Akay AE. 2020. Using GIS-based multicriteria decision support system for planning road networks with visual quality constraints: a case study of protected areas in Ankara, Turkey. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 192 (7): 1-13. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020- 08417-9
Ullah KM, Hafiz R. 2014. Finding suitable locations for ecotourism development in Cox’s Bazar using geographical information system and analytical hierarchy process. Geocarto International, 29 (3): 256-267. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/10106049.2012.760005
Valentine PS. 1992. Nature-based tourism. In: Weiler B, Hall CM (editors). Special interest tourism. London, Great Britain: Belhaven Press. pp. 105-127. ISBN: 1852930721.
Yang X, Zhao Z, Lu S. 2016. Exploring spatial-temporal patterns of urban human mobility hotspots. Sustainability, 8 (7): 674. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su8070674
Zabihi H, Alizadeh M, Wolf ID, Karami M, Ahmad A, Salamian H. 2020. A GIS-based fuzzy-analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) for ecotourism suitability decision making: A case study of Babol in Iran. Tourism Management Perspectives, 36 100726. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100726
Zarghi AH, Bidkhori A, Hosseini SM. 2019. Site Suitability Evaluation for Ecotourism Using GIS & MCDM: A Case Study of Bazangan Lake Watershed, Iran. Journal of Novel Applied Sciences, 8 (8): 170-181. doi: http://jnasci.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/12/JNASCI-2019-170-181.pdf