U.S. national parks accessibility and visitation

被引:0
作者
Xing-ju Shen
Rui-hong Huang
Jin-shan Zhang
机构
[1] Southwest Minzu University,College of Historical Culture & Tourism
[2] Northern Arizona University,Department of Geography, Planning, and Recreation
[3] Chinese Academy of Sciences,Key Laboratory of Mountain Hazards and Earth Surface Process, Institute of Mountain Hazards and Environment
来源
Journal of Mountain Science | 2019年 / 16卷
关键词
U.S. National Park; Accessibility; Visitation; Distance decay; GIS;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Accessibility is a factor affecting national park visitation. However, the effect of accessibility on national park visitation is not fully understood. This paper examines the relationship between U.S. national park visitation and accessibility. First, the global and local accessibility indexes of each park unit are computed based on an accessibility model that takes into account the surrounding population and its proximity to the park unit. Integrated in the model is a distance decay coefficient that is derived from U.S. national park visitor surveys and therefore pertinent to the case of study. Then correlation analysis is performed between park visitation and accessibility based on park types, regions, and visitation types. Results show that total visitation is positively related to accessibility in National Memorials, Military Parks and Battlefield Parks/Sites but negatively related to accessibility in national parks and national monuments. However, recreational overnight stay visits are commonly negatively correlated to accessibility for almost all park types. Moreover, local accessibility index displays enhanced correlation coefficients with improved significance levels in many categories of analysis. Results suggest that historical/cultural national parks which often show positive correlations tend to attract more local visitors, but nature-based parks which mainly show negative correlations tend to attract more distant visitors.
引用
收藏
页码:2894 / 2906
页数:12
相关论文
共 45 条
[11]  
Dwyer L(1959)How accessibility shapes land use Journal of American Institute of Planners 25 73-76
[12]  
Kim C(2011)Comparison of values of pearson’s and spearman’s Correlation coefficients on the same sets of data Quaestiones Geographicae 30 87-93
[13]  
Floyd M(2015)A destination too far? Modelling destination accessibility and distance decay in tourism GeoJournal 80 33-46
[14]  
Gobster PH(2012)Robustness of distance decay for international pleasure travelers: A longitudinal approach International Journal of Tourism Research 14 409-420
[15]  
Hanink DM(2003)Distance Decay and the Impact of Effective Tourism Exclusion Zones on International Travel Flows Journal of Travel Research 42 159-165
[16]  
White K(2002)Perceived constraints to state park visitation: A comparison of formerusers and nonusers Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 20 61-75
[17]  
Hansen WG(2016)Measuring recreational visitation at U.S. National Parks with crowd-sourced photographs Journal of Environmental Management 183 703-711
[18]  
Hauke J(2014)Declining national park visitation: An economic analysis Journal of Leisure Research 46 153-164
[19]  
Kossowski T(2005)Racial variations in commuting times: What does the evidence suggest? The Professional Geographer 57 66-82
[20]  
Hooper J(2013)Why do so few minority people visit National Parks? Visitation and the accessibility of “America’s Best Idea” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103 437-464