Diversification of Municipalities Located in the Impact Area of National Parks in Terms of Environmental Requirements of Sustainable Tourism
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- adjustment of tourism to the resources, quality, and capacity of the environment;
- utilization of local natural, human, and material resources in tourism services;
- adaptation of tourist facilities to the character of the area, fitting in with the local natural and cultural landscape;
- integration of tourism with local spatial and social development so that it is socially accepted and beneficial for the local community [16].
- destination management indicators—described, e.g., by customer satisfaction;
- economic indicators—described, e.g., by the volume and value of the tourism flow at the destination, performance of the tourism enterprise(s), quantity and quality of tourism employment, and the tourism supply chain;
- local socio-cultural impacts—indicators described, e.g., by the percentage of residents who are satisfied with the tourism at the destination, the percentage of residents that are satisfied with the impacts of tourism on the destination’s identity, and the percentage of the events in the destination that are focused on traditional/local culture and heritage, protecting and enhancing the cultural heritage, local identity, and assets;
- environmental impact indicators—describing the impact of transport, air quality, solid waste management, sewage treatment, water consumption, energy usage, and activities focused on landscape and biodiversity protection.
2. Objectives, Study Area, Materials, and Methods
- ▪
- the shaping and maintenance of green areas;
- ▪
- waste management;
- ▪
- wastewater management.
- filtering data collected in the Local Data Bank (BDL) [34] in the fields of: tourism, state, and environmental protection and population;
- determination of indicators for the selected features to achieve their comparability;
- normalization of indicators in order to determine their significance in the implementation of sustainable tourism;
- designation of a synthetic indicator describing the rate of sustainable tourism implementation in terms of sewage and waste management, and green area management.
- compliance of tourism with natural conditions, among others through activities aimed at the protection of the landscape and green areas and preservation of the natural environment as a whole;
- development of tourism activity in an integrated way with proper spatial planning;
- the amount of municipal sewage in relation to the number of inhabitants and tourists (dam3 per capita)—X1;
- the amount of waste generated during the year in relation to the number of inhabitants and tourists (t per capita)—X2;
- the number of septic tanks in relation to the number of residential buildings and buildings with housing–service functions (-)—X3.
- the total area of agricultural land (ha) in a municipality subject to transformation for non-agricultural purposes in the local spatial development plans, compared to the total area of agricultural land in the municipality (ha)—X4 (-);
- the total area of forest land (ha) in a municipality subject to transformation for non-forest purposes in the local spatial development plans, compared to the total area of forest land in the municipality (ha)—X5 (-).
- expenditures on the maintenance of green areas related to the total area of public green areas—X6 (PLN/ha);
- public green areas (parks, greenery, and housing estate greenery) related to the number of inhabitants and tourists—X7 (ha per capita).
- —the value of jth indicator in the ith municipality;
- —the maximum value of jth indicator;
- —the normalized value of xij.
- —the synthetic indicator of the environmental–infrastructural threats to sustainable tourism in the municipalities;
- —the synthetic indicator of the environmental–planning threats to sustainable tourism in the municipalities;
- j—1,2, ..., n;
- n—the number of characteristics taken into account.
3. Results
- municipalities at a very high level, where WI > 0.8—type A; WII > 0.8—Group 1;
- municipalities at a high level, where WI (0.60 ÷ 0.80 >—type B; WII (0.60 ÷ 0.80 >—Group 2;
- municipalities at a medium level, where WI (0.40 ÷ 0.60 >—type C; WII (0.40 ÷ 0.60 >—Group 3;
- municipalities at a low-level, where WI (0.20 ÷ 0.40 >—type D; WII (0.20 ÷ 0.40 >—Group 4;
- municipalities at a very low level, where WI < 0.2—type E; WII < 0.2 Group 5.
- municipalities of highly mixed characteristics of sustainable tourism, where development in the field of sewage and waste infrastructure was evaluated very well, but activities related to the maintenance of green areas and preservation of forest–agricultural landscapes were evaluated negatively (A-4, A-5, B-4, and B-5)—4%; or vice versa (D-1, D-2, E-1, and E-2)—1%;
- municipalities with a low degree of the studied criteria of sustainable tourism, where infrastructural issues were evaluated at a medium level, but those related to green areas and forest–agricultural landscapes were rated very low (C-4 and C-5)—1%; or vice versa (D-3 and E-3)—2%.
4. Discussion and Conclusions
- the activities in the field of wastewater and waste management can be highly rated in 77 cases, medium in 23 cases, and very low in the case of 3 municipalities;
- the activities in the field of forest and rural landscape preservation as well as in the field of development and maintenance of green areas can be highly rated in the case of 10 municipalities, medium in 88 units, and low in 5 cases;
- the spatial diversification of the municipalities in terms of environmental and planning issues is low, but higher in terms of wastewater and waste management;
- the level of activities in the field of sewage and waste management, preservation of the forest and the agricultural landscape, and management of green areas is not related to a location in the impact area of a particular national park.
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Environment 2019. Available online: https://stat.gov.pl/en/topics/environment-energy/environment/environment-2019,1,11.html (accessed on 20 February 2020).
- Liszewski, S. Przestrzeń turystyczna parków narodowych w Polsce. In Gospodarka I Przestrzeń; Domański, B., Kurek, W., Eds.; IGiGP UJ: Kraków, Poland, 2009; pp. 187–201. ISBN 978-83-88424-45-8. [Google Scholar]
- Zawilińska, B.; Mika, M. National parks and local development in Poland: A municipal perspective. Hum. Geogr. 2013, 7, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Schägner, J.P.; Brander, L.; Maes, J.; Paracchini, M.L.; Hartje, V. Mapping recreational visits and values of European National Parks by combining statistical modelling and unit value transfer. J. Nat. Conserv. 2016, 31, 71–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ziarnicka-Wojtaszek, A.; Zawora, T. Selected methods pertaining to the assessment of agricultural tourism attractiveness of rural regions. Infrastruktura i Ekologia Terenów Wiejskich 2011, 2011/02, 235–245. [Google Scholar]
- Stokłosa, Ł.; Krupa, J. Sustainable tourism development in protected areas. Wyższa Szkoła Turystyki i Języków Obcych 2013, 11, 17–32. [Google Scholar]
- Podawca, K.; Pawłat-Zawrzykraj, A. Diversifying tourism in municipalities within impact areas of national parks. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2018, 27, 2213–2227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balmford, A.; Green, J.M.H.; Anderson, M.; Beresford, J.; Huang, C.; Naidoo, R.; Walpole, M.; Manica, A. Walk on the Wild Side: Estimating the Global Magnitude of Visits to Protected Areas. PLoS Biol. 2015, 13, e1002074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Simmonds, C.; Canon, G.; Wilkinson, T. Crisis in our national parks: How tourists are loving nature to death. Guard 2018. Available online: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/nov/20/national-parks-america-overcrowding-crisis-tourism-visitation-solutions (accessed on 6 March 2020).
- Eagles, P.F.J.; McCool, S.F. Tourism in National Parks and Protected Areas: Planning and Management; CABI Publishing: Oxfordshire, UK, 2002; ISBN 0-85199-589-6. [Google Scholar]
- Puhakka, R. Increasing role of tourism in Finnish national parks. FENNIN-Int. J. Geogr. 2008, 186, 47–58. [Google Scholar]
- Leung, Y.F.; Spenceley, A.; Hvenegaard, G.; Buckley, R. Tourism and Visitor Management in Protected Areas: Guidelines for Sustainability; Groves, C., Ed.; Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland, 2018; ISBN 978-2-8317-1898-9. [Google Scholar]
- IUCN. Commission on National Parks and Protected Areas. In Parks for Life: Action for Protected Areas in Europe; IUCN: Gland, Switzerland, 1994; ISBN 2-8317-0230-5. [Google Scholar]
- Mitura, T. The rural tourism as the form of the sustainable tourism on the example of the podkarpacki province. In Europa w Ujęciu Interdyscyplinarnym—Społeczeństwo, Polityka, Gospodarka, Turystyka; Petrecka, B., Dyrda-Maciałek, S., Rejman, K., Eds.; Wydawnictwo Państwowej Wyższej Szkoły Techniczno-Ekonomicznej im. ks. Bronisława Markiewicza: Jarosław, Poland, 2015; pp. 337–350. ISBN 978-83-63909-71-0. [Google Scholar]
- Kieżel, M.; Piotrowski, P.; Wiechoczek, J. The Research on Sustainable Tourism in the Light of Its Paradigms. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zaręba, D. Ekoturystyka, 3rd ed.; PWN: Warszawa, Poland, 2019; ISBN 978-83-01-16017-3. [Google Scholar]
- WTO. Indicators of Sustainable Development for Tourism Destinations; A Guidebook World Tourism Organization; WTO: Madrid, Spain, 2004; ISBN 92-844-0726-5. [Google Scholar]
- Oleśniewicz, P.; Pytel, S.; Markiewicz-Patkowska, J.; Szromek, A.R.; Jandová, S. A Model of the Sustainable Management of the Natural Environment in National Parks—A Case Study of National Parks in Poland. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Weaver, D.B.; Lawton, L.J. A new visitation paradigm for protected areas. Tour. Manag. 2017, 60, 140–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kowalczyk, M. Wskaźniki zrównoważonego rozwoju turystyki. Człowiek I Środowisko 2011, 35, 3–4. [Google Scholar]
- Kapera, I. Rozwój Zrównoważony Turystyki. Problemy Przyrodnicze, Społeczne I Gospodarcze na Przykładzie Polski; Oficyna Wydawnicza AFM: Kraków, Poland, 2018; ISBN 978-83-66007-28-4. [Google Scholar]
- European Tourism Indicators System for Sustainable Destination Management | Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/tourism/offer/sustainable/indicators_en (accessed on 20 March 2020).
- Dymond, S.J. Indicators of Sustainable Tourism in New Zealand: A Local Government Perspective. J. Sustain. Tour. 1997, 5, 279–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ceron, J.-P.; Dubois, G. Tourism and Sustainable Development Indicators: The Gap between Theoretical Demands and Practical Achievements. Curr. Issues Tour. 2003, 6, 54–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tanguay, G.A.; Rajaonson, J.; Therrien, M.-C. Sustainable tourism indicators: Selection criteria for policy implementation and scientific recognition. J. Sustain. Tour. 2013, 21, 862–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huhtala, M. Assessment of the local economic impacts of national park tourism: The case of Pallas-Ounastunturi National Park. For. Snow Landsc. Res. 2007, 223–238. [Google Scholar]
- Huhtala, M.; Kajala, L.; Vatanen, E. Local Economic Impacts of National Park Visitors Spending: The Development Process of an Estimation Method; Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute; Finnish Forest Research Institute: Vantaa, Finland, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Reihanian, A.; Hin, T.W.; Kahrom, E.; Binti Mahmood, N.Z. A framework for implementing sustainable tourism in national parks of Iran: Development and use of sustainable tourism indica-tors in Boujagh National Park, Iran. Casp. J. Environ. Sci. 2015, 13, 41–52. [Google Scholar]
- Mihanyar, P.; Rahman, S.A.; Aminudin, N. Investigating the Effect of National Park Sustainability on National Park Behavioral Intention: Kinabalu National Park. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2016, 37, 284–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kruczek, Z.; Przybyło-Kisielewska, K. Tourist traffic in national parks and consequences of excessive frequency of visitors. In Parki Narodowe I Otoczenie Społeczno-Gospodarcze: Skazani na Dialog; Walas, B., Pasierbek, T., Sobczuk, J., Pawlusiński, R., Niznansky, B., Nemethy, S., Eds.; Wyższa Szkoła turystyki i Ekologii: Sucha Beskidzka, Poland, 2019; pp. 161–170. ISBN 978-83-947044-1-4. [Google Scholar]
- Rogowski, M. Assessing the tourism carrying capacity of hiking trails in the Szczeliniec Wielki and Błędne Skały in Stołowe Mts. National Park. For. Res. Pap. 2019, 80, 125–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mazurkiewicz, L. Prosta metoda oceny poziomu rozwoju turystyki zrównoważonej (na przykładzie turystyki zdrowotnej). Zesz. Nauk. Tur. I Rekreac. 2018, 1, 7–18. [Google Scholar]
- Podawca, K. Planowanie przestrzenne gmin a zagospodarowanie przestrzenne parków narodowych. Acta Sci. Pol. Archit. 2006, 5, 97–110. [Google Scholar]
- Local Data Bank of Statistics in Poland. Available online: https://bdl.stat.gov.pl/BDL/start (accessed on 10 February 2020).
- Hadzik, A.; Hadzik, A. The chosen aspects of sustainable tourism on country health resort areas. Infrastruct. Ecol. Rural Areas 2008, 2018/02, 287–296. [Google Scholar]
- Para, A. Zasady zrównoważonego rozwoju turystyki-bariery i szanse dla branży turystycznej, Zrównoważony rozwój turystyki w regionach Polski. Wyższa Szkoła Tur. I Języków Obcych 2013, 11, 5–16. [Google Scholar]
- Krupa, J. Działania proekologiczne w turystyce szansą na jej zrównoważony rozwój. Zesz. Nauk. Tur. I Rekreac. 2014, 1, 5–23. [Google Scholar]
- Mrozik, K.; Napierała, M.; Idczak, P. Ländliche Gebiete als die Herausforderung der Siedlungswasserwirtschaft in Polen. Wasserwirtschaft 2020, 38–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Śleszyński, P.; Deręgowska, A.; Kubiak, Ł.; Sudra, P.; Zielińska, B. Analiza Stanu I Uwarunkowań Prac Planistycznych W Gminach W 2017 Roku; Instytut Geografii i Przestrzennego Zagospodarowania PAN: Warszawa, Poland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Hurkała, T. Szczawnica jako przykład rozwoju zrównoważonego gminy uzdrowiskowej. J. Ecol. Health 2010, 14, 169–175. [Google Scholar]
No. | Municipality | NP 1. | X1 | X2 | X3 | X4 | X5 | X6 | X7 | Z1 | Z2 | Z3 | Z4 | Z5 | Z6 | Z7 | WI | WII |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rural municipalities2 | ||||||||||||||||||
1 | Górzyca | I | 0.033 | 0.201 | 0.281 | 3.941 | 0 | 12.03 | 9.833 | 0.746 | 0.412 | 0.719 | 0.932 | 1.000 | 0.258 | 0.117 | 0.626 | 0.577 |
2 | Słońsk | 0.028 | 0.222 | 0.232 | 0.359 | 0.008 | 6.38 | 16.491 | 0.785 | 0.351 | 0.768 | 0.994 | 0.999 | 0.137 | 0.196 | 0.634 | 0.582 | |
3 | Lipnica Wielka | II | 0.023 | 0.060 | 0.191 | 0 | 0 | 0.10 | 0.000 | 0.823 | 0.825 | 0.809 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.002 | 0.000 | 0.819 | 0.501 |
4 | Zawoja | 0.004 | 0.077 | 0.835 | 10.566 | 0 | 0.87 | 0.000 | 0.969 | 0.775 | 0.165 | 0.818 | 1.000 | 0.019 | 0.000 | 0.636 | 0.459 | |
5 | Narewka | III | 0.016 | 0.165 | 0.083 | 6.318 | 0.428 | 0.00 | 4.650 | 0.877 | 0.518 | 0.917 | 0.891 | 0.946 | 0.000 | 0.055 | 0.770 | 0.473 |
6 | Białowieża | 0.044 | 0.286 | 0.100 | 2.610 | 0.138 | 0.63 | 18.062 | 0.662 | 0.164 | 0.900 | 0.955 | 0.983 | 0.014 | 0.215 | 0.575 | 0.542 | |
7 | Wizna | IV | 0.006 | 0.100 | 0.518 | 0 | 0.033 | 0.71 | 2.149 | 0.954 | 0.708 | 0.482 | 1.000 | 0.996 | 0.015 | 0.026 | 0.714 | 0.509 |
8 | Nowy Dwór | 0.005 | 0.074 | 0.178 | 0.109 | 0 | 0.00 | 84.025 | 0.962 | 0.784 | 0.822 | 0.998 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 1.000 | 0.856 | 0.750 | |
9 | Bargłów Kościelny | 0.003 | 0.097 | 0.438 | 3.272 | 0 | 2.33 | 0.596 | 0.977 | 0.716 | 0.562 | 0.944 | 1.000 | 0.050 | 0.007 | 0.752 | 0.500 | |
10 | Grajewo | 0.001 | 0.082 | 0.443 | 0.121 | 0.035 | 0.85 | 1.058 | 0.992 | 0.760 | 0.557 | 0.998 | 0.996 | 0.018 | 0.013 | 0.770 | 0.506 | |
11 | Jaświły | 0.007 | 0.081 | 0.442 | 1.930 | 0.102 | 23.75 | 1.748 | 0.946 | 0.763 | 0.558 | 0.967 | 0.987 | 0.510 | 0.021 | 0.756 | 0.621 | |
12 | Radziłów | 0.007 | 0.087 | 0.330 | 0 | 0 | 10.03 | 0.000 | 0.946 | 0.746 | 0.670 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.215 | 0.000 | 0.787 | 0.554 | |
13 | Sztabin | 0.005 | 0.126 | 0.524 | 0.305 | 0 | 0.00 | 4.883 | 0.962 | 0.632 | 0.476 | 0.995 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.058 | 0.690 | 0.513 | |
14 | Trzcianne | 0.008 | 0.104 | 0.370 | 0.462 | 0.058 | 0.00 | 0.000 | 0.938 | 0.696 | 0.630 | 0.992 | 0.993 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.755 | 0.496 | |
15 | Czarna | V | 0.004 | 0.078 | 0.752 | 0.981 | 0 | 0.96 | 1.895 | 0.969 | 0.772 | 0.248 | 0.983 | 1.000 | 0.021 | 0.023 | 0.663 | 0.507 |
16 | Cisna | 0.050 | 0.206 | 0.241 | 0.399 | 0 | 0.52 | 0.943 | 0.615 | 0.398 | 0.759 | 0.993 | 1.000 | 0.011 | 0.011 | 0.591 | 0.504 | |
17 | Lutowiska | 0.014 | 0.082 | 0.169 | 0 | 0 | 2.72 | 3.105 | 0.892 | 0.760 | 0.831 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.058 | 0.037 | 0.828 | 0.524 | |
18 | Chojnice | VI | 0.033 | 0.214 | 0.134 | 1.752 | 0 | 46.57 | 61.062 | 0.746 | 0.374 | 0.866 | 0.970 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.727 | 0.662 | 0.924 |
19 | Bierzwnik | VII | 0.011 | 0.130 | 0.419 | 0.004 | 0 | 11.24 | 0.000 | 0.915 | 0.620 | 0.581 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.241 | 0.000 | 0.705 | 0.560 |
20 | Nowy Targ | VIII | 0.011 | 0.083 | 0.291 | 0.108 | 0.023 | 0.80 | 0.063 | 0.915 | 0.757 | 0.709 | 0.998 | 0.997 | 0.017 | 0.001 | 0.794 | 0.503 |
21 | Ochotnica Dolna | 0.035 | 0.097 | 0.116 | 0 | 0 | 0.01 | 0.000 | 0.731 | 0.716 | 0.884 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.777 | 0.500 | |
22 | Mszana Dolna | 0.011 | 0.053 | 0.582 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.000 | 0.915 | 0.845 | 0.418 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.726 | 0.500 | |
23 | Kamienica | 0.009 | 0.067 | 0.183 | 0 | 0.014 | 0.00 | 0.476 | 0.931 | 0.804 | 0.817 | 1.000 | 0.998 | 0.000 | 0.006 | 0.851 | 0.501 | |
24 | Niedźwiedź | 0.009 | 0.090 | 0.686 | 14.377 | 0.034 | 2.51 | 0.000 | 0.931 | 0.737 | 0.314 | 0.753 | 0.996 | 0.054 | 0.000 | 0.661 | 0.451 | |
25 | Lewin Kłodzki | IX | 0.022 | 0.204 | 0.023 | 1.708 | 0 | 9.13 | 4.573 | 0.831 | 0.404 | 0.977 | 0.971 | 1.000 | 0.196 | 0.054 | 0.737 | 0.555 |
26 | Tomaszów Maz. | X | 0.004 | 0.208 | 0.686 | 3.141 | 0 | 4.51 | 5.524 | 0.969 | 0.392 | 0.314 | 0.946 | 1.000 | 0.097 | 0.066 | 0.558 | 0.527 |
27 | Stare Babice | 0.033 | 0.288 | 0.169 | 0 | 1.560 | 7.49 | 35.021 | 0.746 | 0.158 | 0.831 | 1.000 | 0.802 | 0.161 | 0.417 | 0.578 | 0.595 | |
28 | Kampinos | 0.020 | 0.174 | 0.657 | 10.691 | 2.017 | 21.53 | 4.655 | 0.846 | 0.491 | 0.343 | 0.816 | 0.744 | 0.462 | 0.055 | 0.560 | 0.520 | |
29 | Brochów | 0.020 | 0.158 | 0.328 | 38.960 | 0.407 | 0.00 | 6.946 | 0.846 | 0.538 | 0.672 | 0.330 | 0.948 | 0.000 | 0.083 | 0.685 | 0.340 | |
30 | Izabelin | 0.053 | 0.244 | 0.235 | 12.471 | 0 | 37.10 | 3.137 | 0.592 | 0.287 | 0.765 | 0.785 | 1.000 | 0.797 | 0.037 | 0.548 | 0.655 | |
31 | Czosnów | 0.017 | 0.197 | 0.197 | 1.058 | 0 | 1.62 | 0.449 | 0.869 | 0.424 | 0.803 | 0.982 | 1.000 | 0.035 | 0.005 | 0.699 | 0.505 | |
32 | Leszno | 0.026 | 0.242 | 0.450 | 16.436 | 1.092 | 4.39 | 4.545 | 0.800 | 0.292 | 0.550 | 0.717 | 0.862 | 0.094 | 0.054 | 0.547 | 0.432 | |
33 | Leoncin | 0.009 | 0.124 | 0.463 | 17.408 | 0.306 | 1.20 | 0.181 | 0.931 | 0.637 | 0.537 | 0.700 | 0.961 | 0.026 | 0.002 | 0.702 | 0.422 | |
34 | Podgórzyn | XI | 0.036 | 0.232 | 0.336 | 5.479 | 0.288 | 0.00 | 1.162 | 0.723 | 0.322 | 0.664 | 0.906 | 0.963 | 0.000 | 0.014 | 0.570 | 0.471 |
35 | Osiek Jasielski | XII | 0.007 | 0.078 | 0.493 | 12.563 | 0.037 | 10.41 | 0.000 | 0.946 | 0.772 | 0.507 | 0.784 | 0.995 | 0.224 | 0.000 | 0.742 | 0.501 |
36 | Sękowa | 0.019 | 0.095 | 0.137 | 5.376 | 0.984 | 3.00 | 0.201 | 0.854 | 0.722 | 0.863 | 0.908 | 0.875 | 0.064 | 0.002 | 0.813 | 0.462 | |
37 | Lipinki | 0.013 | 0.105 | 0.072 | 0 | 0 | 1.45 | 0.000 | 0.900 | 0.693 | 0.928 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.031 | 0.000 | 0.840 | 0.508 | |
38 | Nowy Żmigród | 0.010 | 0.072 | 0.476 | 0 | 0 | 1.42 | 2.701 | 0.923 | 0.789 | 0.524 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.030 | 0.032 | 0.746 | 0.516 | |
39 | Dębowiec | 0.014 | 0.084 | 0.746 | 0 | 0.113 | 0.02 | 0.000 | 0.892 | 0.754 | 0.254 | 1.000 | 0.986 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.634 | 0.497 | |
40 | Krempna | 0.019 | 0.079 | 0.269 | 0 | 0 | 0.87 | 32.377 | 0.854 | 0.769 | 0.731 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.019 | 0.385 | 0.785 | 0.601 | |
41 | Kobylin-Borzymy | XIII | 0.000 | 0.056 | 0.680 | 1.468 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.000 | 1.000 | 0.836 | 0.320 | 0.975 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.719 | 0.494 |
42 | Sokoły | 0.007 | 0.095 | 0.515 | 0.821 | 0.048 | 0.00 | 0.120 | 0.946 | 0.722 | 0.485 | 0.986 | 0.994 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.718 | 0.495 | |
43 | Turośń Kościelna | 0.009 | 0.092 | 0.454 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.000 | 0.931 | 0.731 | 0.546 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.736 | 0.500 | |
44 | Wielka Wieś | XIV | 0.031 | 0.233 | 0.037 | 0.505 | 0 | 9.59 | 2.228 | 0.762 | 0.319 | 0.963 | 0.991 | 1.000 | 0.206 | 0.027 | 0.681 | 0.556 |
45 | Jerzmanowice -Przeginia | 0.013 | 0.130 | 0.670 | 0.221 | 0 | 0.51 | 0.000 | 0.900 | 0.620 | 0.330 | 0.996 | 1.000 | 0.011 | 0.000 | 0.617 | 0.502 | |
46 | Sułoszowa | 0.018 | 0.101 | 0.149 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.000 | 0.862 | 0.705 | 0.851 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.806 | 0.500 | |
47 | Łapsze Niżne | XV | 0.019 | 0.090 | 0.043 | 0 | 0 | 6.92 | 4.459 | 0.854 | 0.737 | 0.957 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.149 | 0.053 | 0.849 | 0.550 |
48 | Krościenkon/Dunajcem | 0.016 | 0.139 | 0.328 | 0.739 | 7.887 | 9.18 | 0.000 | 0.877 | 0.594 | 0.672 | 0.987 | 0.000 | 0.197 | 0.000 | 0.714 | 0.296 | |
49 | Czorsztyn | 0.023 | 0.087 | 0.092 | 0 | 0 | 5.32 | 0.000 | 0.823 | 0.746 | 0.908 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.114 | 0.000 | 0.826 | 0.529 | |
50 | Ludwin | XVI | 0.010 | 0.048 | 0.403 | 0.017 | 0 | 0.33 | 0.092 | 0.923 | 0.860 | 0.597 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.007 | 0.001 | 0.793 | 0.502 |
51 | Stary Brus | 0.008 | 0.048 | 0.102 | 2.646 | 0 | 8.35 | 7.545 | 0.938 | 0.860 | 0.898 | 0.954 | 1.000 | 0.179 | 0.090 | 0.899 | 0.556 | |
52 | Hańsk | 0.016 | 0.066 | 0.038 | 0 | 0 | 2.90 | 5.406 | 0.877 | 0.807 | 0.962 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.062 | 0.064 | 0.882 | 0.532 | |
53 | Wierzbica | 0.013 | 0.075 | 0.532 | 1.095 | 0 | 0.96 | 2.275 | 0.900 | 0.781 | 0.468 | 0.981 | 1.000 | 0.021 | 0.027 | 0.716 | 0.507 | |
54 | Sosnowica | 0.015 | 0.058 | 0.409 | 0 | 0 | 1.20 | 3.692 | 0.885 | 0.830 | 0.591 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.026 | 0.044 | 0.769 | 0.517 | |
55 | Urszulin | 0.012 | 0.098 | 0.417 | 3.553 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.145 | 0.908 | 0.713 | 0.583 | 0.939 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.735 | 0.485 | |
56 | Zamość | XVII | 0.006 | 0.092 | 0.288 | 7.286 | 0 | 0.00 | 1.114 | 0.992 | 0.839 | 0.409 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.747 | 0.500 |
57 | Adamów | 0.001 | 0.055 | 0.591 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.000 | 0.954 | 0.731 | 0.712 | 0.875 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.013 | 0.799 | 0.472 | |
58 | Ustka | XVIII | 0.130 | 0.291 | 0.096 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 31.731 | 0.000 | 0.149 | 0.904 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.378 | 0.351 | 0.594 |
59 | Główczyce | 0.012 | 0.099 | 0.610 | 1.240 | 0 | 0.00 | 26.496 | 0.908 | 0.711 | 0.390 | 0.979 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.315 | 0.669 | 0.573 | |
60 | Wicko | 0.023 | 0.175 | 0.133 | 0.247 | 0 | 9.99 | 0.657 | 0.823 | 0.488 | 0.867 | 0.996 | 1.000 | 0.215 | 0.008 | 0.726 | 0.555 | |
61 | Smołdzino | 0.004 | 0.156 | 0.364 | 3.164 | 0 | 1.13 | 3.176 | 0.969 | 0.544 | 0.636 | 0.946 | 1.000 | 0.024 | 0.038 | 0.716 | 0.502 | |
62 | Górno | XIX | 0.011 | 0.051 | 0.661 | 0 | 0 | 0.43 | 0.000 | 0.915 | 0.851 | 0.339 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.009 | 0.000 | 0.702 | 0.502 |
63 | Masłów | 0.016 | 0.072 | 0.292 | 15.089 | 0 | 0.00 | 1.030 | 0.877 | 0.789 | 0.708 | 0.740 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.012 | 0.791 | 0.438 | |
64 | Łączna | 0.008 | 0.067 | 0.383 | 0.295 | 0.027 | 0.00 | 0.172 | 0.938 | 0.804 | 0.617 | 0.995 | 0.997 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.787 | 0.498 | |
65 | Bieliny | 0.011 | 0.032 | 0.129 | 9.045 | 1.099 | 0.00 | 0.196 | 0.915 | 0.906 | 0.871 | 0.844 | 0.861 | 0.000 | 0.002 | 0.898 | 0.427 | |
66 | Nowa Słupia | 0.011 | 0.000 | 0.209 | 0.806 | 1.141 | 1.72 | 2.798 | 0.915 | 1.000 | 0.791 | 0.986 | 0.855 | 0.037 | 0.033 | 0.902 | 0.478 | |
67 | Poronin | XX | 0.025 | 0.190 | 0.516 | 1.667 | 0 | 0.00 | 0.000 | 0.808 | 0.444 | 0.484 | 0.971 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.579 | 0.493 |
68 | Bukowina | 0.023 | 0.191 | 0.800 | 1.647 | 0.015 | 2.93 | 0.000 | 0.823 | 0.442 | 0.200 | 0.972 | 0.998 | 0.063 | 0.000 | 0.488 | 0.508 | |
69 | Kościelisko | 0.026 | 0.195 | 0.458 | 2.962 | 0.102 | 0.00 | 0.406 | 0.800 | 0.430 | 0.542 | 0.949 | 0.987 | 0.000 | 0.005 | 0.591 | 0.485 | |
70 | Dopiewo | XXI | 0.032 | 0.328 | 0.137 | 9.594 | 0 | 22.98 | 4.342 | 0.754 | 0.041 | 0.863 | 0.835 | 1.000 | 0.493 | 0.052 | 0.553 | 0.595 |
71 | Komorniki | 0.045 | 0.342 | 0.054 | 0 | 0 | 17.82 | 4.584 | 0.654 | 0.000 | 0.946 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.383 | 0.055 | 0.533 | 0.609 | |
72 | Krasnopol | XXII | 0.000 | 0.080 | 0.511 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 1.545 | 1.000 | 0.766 | 0.489 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.018 | 0.752 | 0.505 |
73 | Nowinka | 0.008 | 0.125 | 0.134 | 0 | 0.064 | 0.00 | 1.208 | 0.938 | 0.635 | 0.866 | 1.000 | 0.992 | 0.000 | 0.014 | 0.813 | 0.502 | |
74 | Giby | 0.000 | 0.089 | 1.194 | 4.630 | 0.195 | 0.00 | 0.000 | 1.000 | 0.740 | 0.000 | 0.920 | 0.975 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.580 | 0.474 | |
75 | Suwałki | 0.012 | 0.114 | 0.245 | 58.121 | 0.112 | 0.12 | 5.468 | 0.908 | 0.667 | 0.755 | 0.000 | 0.986 | 0.003 | 0.065 | 0.776 | 0.263 | |
Urban–rural municipalities2 | ||||||||||||||||||
76 | Witnica | I | 0.023 | 0.226 | 0.426 | 0 | 1.904 | 8.05 | 31.042 | 0.701 | 0.549 | 0.184 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.063 | 0.381 | 0.478 | 0.361 |
77 | Jedwabne | IV | 0.006 | 0.140 | 0.380 | 0.445 | 0 | 0.73 | 6.936 | 0.922 | 0.721 | 0.272 | 0.996 | 1.000 | 0.006 | 0.085 | 0.638 | 0.522 |
78 | Rajgród | 0.016 | 0.189 | 0.417 | 0.355 | 0.158 | 0.62 | 18.591 | 0.792 | 0.623 | 0.201 | 0.996 | 0.917 | 0.005 | 0.228 | 0.539 | 0.537 | |
79 | Lipsk | 0.010 | 0.141 | 0.340 | 1.493 | 0.136 | 8.13 | 6.968 | 0.870 | 0.719 | 0.349 | 0.985 | 0.929 | 0.064 | 0.086 | 0.646 | 0.516 | |
80 | Dąbrowa Białostocka | 0.034 | 0.118 | 0.126 | 0.257 | 0 | 24.49 | 4.978 | 0.558 | 0.764 | 0.759 | 0.997 | 1.000 | 0.192 | 0.061 | 0.694 | 0.563 | |
81 | Suchowola | 0.010 | 0.087 | 0.186 | 0.020 | 0 | 11.17 | 4.942 | 0.870 | 0.826 | 0.644 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.088 | 0.061 | 0.780 | 0.537 | |
82 | Goniądz | 0.005 | 0.201 | 0.478 | 0.007 | 0 | 3.20 | 11.272 | 0.935 | 0.599 | 0.084 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.025 | 0.138 | 0.539 | 0.541 | |
83 | Krzyż Wlp. | VII | 0.021 | 0.229 | 0.456 | 0.336 | 0 | 5.56 | 13.289 | 0.727 | 0.543 | 0.126 | 0.997 | 1.000 | 0.044 | 0.163 | 0.466 | 0.551 |
84 | Tuczno | 0.020 | 0.190 | 0.340 | 0.568 | 0.029 | 6.71 | 4.738 | 0.740 | 0.621 | 0.349 | 0.994 | 0.985 | 0.053 | 0.058 | 0.570 | 0.522 | |
85 | Drawno | 0.021 | 0.182 | 0.272 | 0 | 0 | 12.51 | 81.399 | 0.727 | 0.637 | 0.479 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.098 | 1.000 | 0.614 | 0.775 | |
86 | Człopa | 0.015 | 0.180 | 0.251 | 0 | 0 | 7.91 | 25.005 | 0.805 | 0.641 | 0.519 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.062 | 0.307 | 0.655 | 0.592 | |
87 | Dobiegniew | 0.021 | 0.339 | 0.126 | 0.630 | 0 | 11.56 | 11.164 | 0.727 | 0.323 | 0.759 | 0.994 | 1.000 | 0.091 | 0.137 | 0.603 | 0.555 | |
88 | Szczytna | IX | 0.013 | 0.156 | 0.375 | 0 | 0 | 9.10 | 1.335 | 0.831 | 0.689 | 0.282 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.071 | 0.016 | 0.600 | 0.522 |
89 | Radków | 0.017 | 0.196 | 0.137 | 0.608 | 0 | 0.82 | 27.038 | 0.779 | 0.609 | 0.738 | 0.994 | 1.000 | 0.006 | 0.332 | 0.709 | 0.583 | |
90 | Łomianki | X | 0.038 | 0.289 | 0.522 | 6.477 | 0.334 | 12.62 | 10.913 | 0.506 | 0.423 | 0.000 | 0.935 | 0.825 | 0.099 | 0.134 | 0.310 | 0.498 |
91 | Tykocin | XII | 0.018 | 0.153 | 0.274 | 100 | 0.523 | 1.92 | 1.719 | 0.766 | 0.695 | 0.475 | 0.000 | 0.725 | 0.015 | 0.021 | 0.645 | 0.190 |
92 | Suraż | XIII | 0.008 | 0.128 | 0.123 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | 2.959 | 0.896 | 0.745 | 0.764 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.000 | 0.036 | 0.802 | 0.509 |
93 | Choroszcz | 0.017 | 0.179 | 0.506 | 0.201 | 0 | 0.35 | 1.135 | 0.779 | 0.643 | 0.031 | 0.998 | 1.000 | 0.003 | 0.014 | 0.484 | 0.504 | |
94 | Łapy | 0.029 | 0.196 | 0.059 | 0 | 0 | 2.24 | 30.620 | 0.623 | 0.609 | 0.887 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.018 | 0.376 | 0.706 | 0.598 | |
95 | Skała | XIV | 0.019 | 0.209 | 0.221 | 0.845 | 0.132 | 1.96 | 8.130 | 0.753 | 0.583 | 0.577 | 0.992 | 0.931 | 0.015 | 0.100 | 0.638 | 0.509 |
96 | Szczawnica | XV | 0.031 | 0.132 | 0.188 | 0 | 0 | 48.76 | 7.899 | 0.597 | 0.737 | 0.640 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.383 | 0.097 | 0.658 | 0.620 |
97 | Józefów | XVII | 0.008 | 0.042 | 0.443 | 3.702 | 0.240 | 4.54 | 2.160 | 0.896 | 0.916 | 0.151 | 0.963 | 0.874 | 0.036 | 0.027 | 0.655 | 0.475 |
98 | Zwierzyniec | 0.027 | 0.113 | 0.286 | 0.080 | 0 | 13.36 | 13.783 | 0.649 | 0.774 | 0.452 | 0.999 | 1.000 | 0.105 | 0.169 | 0.625 | 0.568 | |
99 | Bodzentyn | XIX | 0.011 | 0.059 | 0.364 | 0.490 | 0 | 1.79 | 0.162 | 0.857 | 0.882 | 0.303 | 0.995 | 1.000 | 0.014 | 0.002 | 0.681 | 0.503 |
100 | Mosina | XXI | 0.020 | 0.284 | 0.420 | 16.696 | 0.057 | 18.32 | 12.022 | 0.740 | 0.433 | 0.195 | 0.833 | 0.970 | 0.144 | 0.148 | 0.456 | 0.524 |
101 | Stęszew | 0.030 | 0.259 | 0.385 | 0.243 | 0 | 6.66 | 17.175 | 0.610 | 0.483 | 0.262 | 0.998 | 1.000 | 0.052 | 0.211 | 0.452 | 0.565 | |
102 | Wolin | XXII | 0.018 | 0.225 | 0.411 | 0 | 0 | 5.64 | 17.014 | 0.766 | 0.551 | 0.213 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.044 | 0.209 | 0.510 | 0.563 |
103 | Międzyzdroje | 0.077 | 0.501 | 0.046 | 0 | 0 | 127.43 | 18.004 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.912 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.221 | 0.304 | 0.805 |
Classification of the Municipalities | No. of the Municipalities Assigned to Specific Types according to the Value of the WI Indicator | No. of the Municipality Types in Terms of Tourism Sustainability | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | Σ | ||
No. of the municipalities assigned to specific groups according to the value of the WII indicator | 1 | 0 1. | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
2 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 8 | |
3 | 13 | 53 | 20 | 2 | 0 | 88 | |
4 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | |
5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
Σ | 15 | 62 | 23 | 3 | 0 | 103 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Pawłat-Zawrzykraj, A.; Podawca, K. Diversification of Municipalities Located in the Impact Area of National Parks in Terms of Environmental Requirements of Sustainable Tourism. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4896. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12124896
Pawłat-Zawrzykraj A, Podawca K. Diversification of Municipalities Located in the Impact Area of National Parks in Terms of Environmental Requirements of Sustainable Tourism. Sustainability. 2020; 12(12):4896. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12124896
Chicago/Turabian StylePawłat-Zawrzykraj, Agata, and Konrad Podawca. 2020. "Diversification of Municipalities Located in the Impact Area of National Parks in Terms of Environmental Requirements of Sustainable Tourism" Sustainability 12, no. 12: 4896. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12124896