نشریه محیط زیست طبیعی

بررسی رابطة الگوی فضایی عناصر سیمای سرزمین و ترجیحات گردشگران در منطقة‌ جنگلی چهل‌چای مینودشت، استان گلستان

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه محیط‌ زیست، دانشکدة جغرافیا و علوم محیطی، دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری،‌سبزوار، ایران.

2 گروه سنجش از دور، دانشکدة جغرافیا و علوم محیطی، دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری دانشگاه حکیم سبزواری،‌سبزوار، ایران.

10.22059/jne.2025.387563.2741

چکیده

الگوی فضایی عناصر سیمای سرزمین نقش مهمی در شکل‌گیری تجربة گردشگران و ترجیحات آنان ایفا می‌کند. نحوة توزیع، تنوع و چیدمان این عناصر، از جمله پوشش‌های طبیعی، کاربری‌های اراضی، مسیرهای ارتباطی و محورهای بصری، تأثیر مستقیمی بر جذابیت یک مقصد گردشگری دارد. گردشگران بسته به ترجیحات فردی خود، به محیط‌هایی با ویژگی‌های فضایی خاص، مانند مناظر طبیعی بکر، مناطق فرهنگی تاریخی یا فضاهای شهری منظم و متنوع، تمایل نشان می‌دهند. درک رابطة میان الگوی فضایی سیمای سرزمین و ترجیحات گردشگران می‌تواند به بهبود برنامه‌ریزی گردشگری، ارتقای کیفیت تجربة گردشگران و توسعة پایدار مقاصد گردشگری کمک کند. مطالعة حاضر به ارزیابی الگوی فضایی عناصر سیمای سرزمین و تأثیر آن بر ترجیحات مکانی گردشگران در منطقة جنگلی چهل ­چای مینودشت واقع در استان گلستان می­ پردازد. برای انجام این پژوهش نخست مجموعه‌ای از معیار­های ذهنی (6 معیار) و عینی (6 معیار) شناسایی و الویت­ بندی شدند. برای ارزیابی الگوهای سیمای سرزمین از 6 سنجة سیمای سرزمین که بیشترین نزدیکی را با معیارهای عینی-ذهنی داشتند، استفاده شد. رابطة بین متغیرها توسط رگرسیون لجستیک رتبه ­ای مورد تجزیه‌و‌تحلیل قرار گرفت. نتایج این مطالعه نشان داد که ویژگی‌های شکلی عناصر سیمای سرزمین (MSI) رابطة معکوس و معنی‌داری با مفاهیمی نظیر تراکم، تنوع، پیچیدگی، پیوستگی و فرم و شکل دارد. همچنین سنجه‌هایی نظیر تراکم لبه‌ها (ED) و ابعاد فراکتالی عناصر (MPFD) رابطة معنی‌داری با این مفاهیم دارند. معیار فاصله و عمق چشم‌انداز تنها معیاری است که با سنجة وسعت و مساحت (CA) رابطة معکوس و معنی‌داری دارد که نشان می‌دهد با افزایش وسعت یک عنصر در ساختار سیمای سرزمین، دید و عمق چشم‌انداز از نظر کاربران کاهش می‌یابد. براساس یافته‌ها، تمایل گردشگران به حضور در مکان‌های با فرم و شکل طبیعی، گسترده با پیوستگی بالا در پوشش گیاهی، شکل زمین و حضور آب مورد تأیید قرار گرفت به‌طوری که محدوده‌های با تراکم لبة بالا (ED) و تنوع شکلی (MSI) بیش از حد متوسط کمترین میزان حضور گردشگران را نشان می‌دهد. این امر بیانگر آن است که گردشگران از مکان‌هایی با پیچیدگی بصری زیاد که به نوعی بیانگر بهم‌ریختگی و تغییرات انسانی زیاد است و خردشدگی عناصر سازندة سیمای سرزمین را به‌همراه دارد، اجتناب می‌کنند. نتایج این پژوهش می‌تواند در مدیریت و برنامه‌ریزی منابع تفرجی با هدف گردشگری مورد استفاده قرار گیرد و به کاهش اثرات مخرب آن کمک نماید.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the relationship between spatial patterns of landscape elements and tourists' preferences in the Chehel-Chay forest area of Minudasht, Golestan Province, Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Fatemeh Shahbeiki 1
  • Zahra Ghelichipour 1
  • Hadi Soltanifard 1
  • Hamed Adab 2

1 Department of Environment, Faculty of Geography and Environmental Sciences, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran.

2 Department of GIS&RS, Faculty of Geography and Environmental Sciences, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran.

چکیده [English]

The spatial pattern of landscape elements significantly influences tourists' experiences and preferences. The distribution, diversity, and arrangement of features such as natural covers, land use types, access routes, and visual landscapes directly affect the attractiveness of tourist destinations. Tourists, depending on individual preferences, are attracted to environments with distinct spatial characteristics, such as pristine natural landscapes, historical-cultural regions, or well-structured and diverse urban settings. Understanding the relationship between landscape spatial patterns and tourist preferences can enhance tourism planning, improve the quality of tourist experiences, and support the sustainable development of tourism destinations.  This study investigates the relationship between landscape patterns and tourist spatial preferences in Chehelchay Minudasht Forest Park, Golestan Province. A combination of subjective (6 criteria) and objective (6 criteria) metrics was identified and prioritized to evaluate tourist preferences. Six landscape metrics were selected to assess spatial patterns, and their relationships were analyzed using rank logistic regression. Results revealed that morphological characteristics of landscape elements (MSI) inversely correlate with density, diversity, complexity, continuity, and form. Metrics such as Edge Density (ED) and Mean Patch Fractal Dimension (MPFD) showed significant relationships with these concepts. . The criteria of distance and depth of view were the only ones to show a significant negative relationship with the metric of Class Area (CA), indicating that with the increase in spatial extent of a landscape element, the visual depth and perspective as perceived by users decreases. The findings suggest that tourist preferences are oriented towards areas featuring natural forms, extensive spatial continuity in vegetation cover and landform, and the presence of water bodies. In contrast, regions with high edge density (ED) and above-average shape complexity (MSI) exhibited the lowest levels of tourist presence. This indicates that tourists tend to avoid locations with excessive visual complexity, which typically reflect a high degree of fragmentation and anthropogenic alteration of landscape structure.  

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Landscape
  • Objective criteria
  • Subjective criteria
  • Tourist preference
  • Spatial pattern
Abedi, R., 2019. The impact of nature tourism on the structural characteristics and biodiversity of Arasbaran forest. Plant Research (Biology of Iran) 32(2). (In Persian)
Appleton, J., 1975. The experience of landscape. Wiley, London
Chen, G., Yan, J., Wang, C., Chen, S., 2024. Expanding the associations between landscape characteristics and aesthetic sensory perception for traditional village public space. Forests 15, 97.
Chi, C. G., Qu, H., 2008. Examining the structural relationships of destination image, tourist satisfaction and destination loyalty: An integrated approach. Tourism Management 29, 624-636
Daniel, T. C., 2001. Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning 54(1–4), 267–281
Echtner, C.M., Ritchie, J.R.B., 1993. The measurement of destination image: An empirical assessment. Journal of Travel Research 31(4), 3–13
Eikaas, I. L., Roussel, H., Thorén, A. K. H., Dramstad, W.E., 2023. Applying landscape ecology in local planning, some experiences. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(4), 3410
English, D.B., White, E.M., Bowker, J.M., Winter, S.A., 2020. A review of the Forest Service's national visitor use monitoring (NVUM) program. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 49(1), 64–90
Fan, J., Qiu, H.L., Wu, X. F., 2014. Tourist destination image, place attachment and tourists’ environmentally responsible behavior: A case of Zhejiang tourist resorts. Tour Trib 29(1), 55-66.
Galdavi, S., Mohammadzadeh, M., 2019. Application of tourist-based management tools in the management of recreational areas. Journal of Humans and Environment 50. (In Persian)
Gan, Y., Zheng, Y., Zhang, L., 2022. Audio-visual analysis of visitors’ landscape preference for city parks: A case study from Zhangzhou, China. Forests 13(9), 1376
Grill, L., Morse, W.C., Schelhas, J., Barlow, B., Wyman, M., 2019. Implications of setting preference differences by race and gender on the applicability of a benefits-based management approach to recreational planning. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 2019
Guo, Y.Z., Zhang, H., Song, S.L., Li, L., Chen, X.L., Zhang, L., 2004. A study of market positioning of China’s outbound travel destinations. Tour Trib, 19(4), 27–32
Gustafson, E.J., 1998. Quantifying landscape spatial pattern: What is the state of the art? Ecosystems 1(2), 143–156
Hunziker, M., Buchecker, M., Hartig, T., 2007. Space and place – Two aspects of the human-landscape relationship. In Kienast, F., Wildi, O., Ghosh, S. (Eds.), A changing world, Springer pp. 47–62
Jorgensen, A., 2011. Beyond the view: Future directions in landscape aesthetics research. Landscape and Urban Planning 100(4), 353-355
Kaplan, R., Kaplan, S., 1989. The experience of nature: A psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Karimi Shah Mazraeh, M., 2018. An introduction to preference creation methods in international tourism. Third International Conference on Tourism, Geography and Clean Environment, Hamadan. (In Persian)
Kienast, F., Frick, J., van Strien, M. J., Hunziker, M., 2015. The Swiss Landscape Monitoring Program—A comprehensive indicator set to measure landscape change. Ecological Modeling 295, 136-150
Kou, Y., Xue, X., 2024. The influence of rural tourism landscape perception on tourists’ revisit intentions: A case study in Nangou village, China. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11, 620
Liang, H., Wu, Z., 2024. The role of single landscape elements in enhancing landscape aesthetics and the sustainable tourism experience: A case study of leisure furniture. Sustainability 16, 10219
Lothian, A., 1999. Landscape and the philosophy of aesthetics: Is landscape quality inherent in the landscape or in the eye of the beholder? Landscape and Urban Planning 44(4), 177-198
Melhosseini Darani, K., Mortazavi, S., Hosseini, S. M., Shayesteh, K., Falahatkar, S., 2021. Quantification of visual criteria of land cover using landscape metrics: A case study of Tonekabon forests of Dohezar-Sehezar. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 22(10), 119-132. (In Persian)
Middleton, V.T.C., Hawkins, R., 1998. Sustainable tourism: A marketing perspective. Routledge Press, Boston
Mörtberg, U.M., Balfors, B., Knol, W.C., 2007. Landscape ecological assessment: A tool for integrating biodiversity issues in strategic environmental assessment and planning. Journal of Environmental Management 82(4), 457–470
Naroei, B., Yael, M., 2021. Evaluation of visual and aesthetic preferences of users from the perspective of urban parks (Case study: Sayyad Shirazi Urban Park, Birjand). Journal of Humans and Environment 19(2), 201-219. (In Persian)
Nasirsalami, M.R., Sohangir, S., 2013. Strategies for improving the quality of human-environment interaction with an environmental psychology approach. Psychological Research 5(19), (In Persian)
Ning, F., Wang, H., Chien, Y.C., Pan, H., Ou, S.J., 2024. An investigation into the shifting landscape preferences of rural residents in Taiwan and their relationship with ecological indicators. Scientific Reports 14, 27893
Ode, Å., Hagerhall, C. M., Sang, N., 2010. Analysing visual landscape complexity: Theory and application. Landscape Research 35(1), 111–131
Oteros-Rozas, E., Martín-López, B., Daw, T. M., et al., 2015. Participatory scenario planning in place-based social-ecological research: Insights and experiences from 23 case studies. Ecology and Society 20(4)
Pits, N., Gorban, I., Alokhina, O., 2013. Influence of recreation impact on forest ecosystems stability and their biodiversity: The case of the Shatsk National Natural Park. Teka Komisji Ochrony i Kształtowania Środowiska Przyrodniczego
Pröbstl-Haider, U., Hunt, L. M., Rupf, R., Haegeli, P., 2020. Choice experiments in outdoor recreation. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism 32, 100321
Qin, R., 2022. Research on children’s outdoor activity space design based on landscape perception—Take Tongle Bay of Changchun North Lake Park as an example. Master’s Thesis, Jilin Agricultural University, Changchun, China
Rangel-Buitrago, N., Ben-Haddad, M., 2024. A 20-year review of the coastal scenery evaluation system. Ocean & Coastal Management 257, 107341
Saeedi, S., Saeedi, S., 2017. Recording the visual characteristics of landscape using indicators: Based on the aesthetic theory of landscape. Journal of Humans and Environment 15(2), 71–91. (In Persian)
Saeedi, S., Mohammadzadeh, M., Salman Mahini, A., Mirkarimi, S. H., 2016. Identifying the most important criteria affecting the visual quality of the landscape. Environmental Science and Technology 18(Special Issue 3), 277-288. (In Persian)
Tobias, S., Müller-Wahl, P., 2013. Can place branding support landscape conservation in city-regions? A case study from Switzerland. Land Use Policy 30(1), 266-275
Turner, M.G., 2005. Landscape ecology in North America: Past, present, and future. Ecology 86(8), 1967–1974
Wartmann, F. M., Stride, C. B., Kienast, F., 2021. Relating landscape ecological metrics with public survey data on perceived landscape quality and place attachment. Landscape Ecology 36, 2367–2393
Zhang, H., Fu, X., Ca, L. A., Lu, L., 2014. Destination image and tourist loyalty: A meta-analysis. Tourism Management 40(1), 213–223
Zhang, J., Zhu, X., Gao, M., 2022. The relationship between habitat diversity and tourists’ visual preference in urban wetland park. Land 11(12), 2284
Zhang, Y., Van Den Berg, A. E., Van Dijk, T., Weitkamp, G., 2017. Quality over quantity: Contribution of urban green space to neighborhood satisfaction. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 14(5), 535
Zhao, Y., Zhang, X., Zhang, G., 2023. China-NIAHS perspective of ancient jujube forest in Sichuan Plateau of Lingbao, Henan Province: Study on the characteristics of landscape spatial pattern. Academic Journal of Management and Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.54097/ajmss.v2i2.7528
Ziaei, M., Torabian, P., 2010. Measuring the acceptable level of negative social impacts of tourists on local communities in Iran: A case study of rural settlements in the Parishan Wetland area. Journal of Geography 27, 205–255. (In Persian)
Ziari, K., Rokhsari, H., 2019. Prioritizing and classifying tourist attractions based on tourists' preferences, case study: Yazd city. Urban Tourism 6(3), 17-31. (In Persian)
نشریه محیط زیست طبیعی
دوره 77، شماره 4
اسفند 1403
صفحه 701-716