Korean Journal of Environment and Ecology (한국환경생태학회지)

Korean Society of Environment and Ecology (한국환경생태학회)
권호 표지

Visitors' Perceptions and Attitudes about Establishing a Cable Car in Mudeungsan Provincial Park

무등산도립공원 케이블카 설치에 대한 탐방객의 인식 및 태도

  • 김상오 (전남대학교 농업생명과학대학 임학과)
  • Received : 2010.11.01
  • Accepted : 2011.06.16
  • Published : 2011.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study examined visitors' perceptions and attitudes about establishing cable car in Mudeungsan Provincial Park (MPP). Data were collected from 401 respondents by a field questionnaire survey in MPP during the September of 2010. 61.7% of respondents opposed to establishing cable car in MPP while 20.6 percent supported it. Respondents showed high level of belief to possible consequences that establishing cable car will result in 'deterioration of ecosystem and natural landscape', 'crowding problem by increased number of visitors', 'disappearance of naturalness or previous nature experiences in MPP'. Respondents, however, presented low belief to 'positive effects on increasing economic income and local economic growth by attracting tourists'. 32.4 percent of the survey respondents evaluated the present MPP as a place of 'Nature Preservation Area (NPA)' and 10.5% as 'Developed Park Area (DPA)'. 48.8% of respondents answered that MPP should be managed as 'NPA' with only 2.5% as DPA. Respondents' socio-demographic characteristics (i.e., gender, age, education level, length of residence in Gwang-ju city), use patterns (number of visits to MPP or to Jungbong and surrounding areas), and normative place condition of MPP showed relationship with the overall support rates about establishing cable car. The results and their implications were discussed.

본 연구는 자연공원의 하나인 무등산도립공원 내 케이블카 설치에 대한 탐방객의 인식 및 태도를 이해하고자 실시되었다. 2010년도 9월 중 무등산도립공원에서 실시된 현지설문조사를 통해 데이터 수집이 이루어졌으며, 총 401명의조사대상자가 본 연구의 분석을 위해 이용되었다. 분석결과에 따르면, 총 응답자의 61.7%가 무등산도립공원 내 케이블카 설치에 대하여 '반대' 의사를 표명하였으며 '찬성' 의사를 나타낸 응답자는 20.6%로 나타났다. 케이블카 설치로 인하여 '생태환경 및 자연경관 훼손', '늘어난 방문객수로 인한 혼잡문제', '무등산도립공원의 자연성 및 자연경험의 소멸이 발생할 것이라는 것에 높은 동의를 보인 반면, '관광객 유치로 인한 경제소득 증대 및 지역경제 성장에 긍정적 영향'에 대해서는 낮은 동의를 나타냈다. 총 응답자의 32.4%가 현재 무등산도립공원을 '자연보존지역'으로 보았으며 10.5%는 '개발공원지역'이라고 응답하였다. 반면, 총 응답자의 48.8%는 무등산도립공원이 '자연보존지역'으로 관리되어야 한다고 응답하였으며 단지 2.5%만이 '개발공원지역'으로 관리되어야 한다고 답변하였다. 인구사회학적 특성(성별, 연령, 학력수준, 광주시 거주기간), 이용행태(무등산도립공원 및 무등산도립공원 내 중봉일대지역의 방문경험)및 장소에 대한 규범이 케이블카 설치에 대한 지지도에 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 연구결과에 대한 몇 가지시사점을 제시하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ambroz, M.(2008) Attitudes of local residents towards the development of tourism in Slovenia: The case of the Primorska, Dolenjska, Gorenjska and Ljubljana regions. Anthropological Notebooks 14(1): 63-79.
  2. Bae, Y.(2010.3) Is establishment of cable cars in Jirisan is really for the disabled? Pressian. (in Korean)
  3. Clayton, S.(2003) Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. In S. Clayton & S. Opotow (Eds.), Identity and the natural environment(pp. 45-65). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  4. Kim, S. and B. Shelby. Influence of ropeway on perceived crowding in a natural park(Unpublished).
  5. Kim, S.(2009) Endangered experience. Monthly Forest 12. (in Korean)
  6. Moore, R. and A. Graefe(1994) Attachment to recreation settings: The case of rail-trail users. Leisure Sciences 16: 17-31. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490409409513214
  7. Mudeungsan Park Managerial Office of Gwang-ju City(1996) Present conditions of Mudeungsan natural park. Mudeungsan Sarang, pp. 5-16. (in Korean)
  8. Nordenstam, B.J.(1994) When communities say NIMBY to their LULUS: factors influencing environmental and social impact perception. Paper presented at the 14th annual meeting of the International Association for Impact Assessment, Quebec, Canada.
  9. Park, J.(2009) [Focus] Designation plan of Mudeungsan Provincial Park as a national park. Monthly Mountain 11(481). (in Korean)
  10. Park, J.(2010) A plan for establishing cable cars in Bukhansan will be settled. Monthly Mountain 10(492). (in Korean)
  11. Scannell, L. and R. Gifford(2010) The relations between natural and civic place attachment and pro-environmental behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology 30: 289-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.01.010
  12. Sheldon, P.J. and T. Var(1984) Resident attitudes of tourism in Northern Wales. Tourism Management 5: 224-233.
  13. Smaldone, D.(2006) The role of time in place attachment. Proceedings of the 2006 Northern Recreation Research Symposium. GTR-NRS-P-14: 47-56.
  14. Stankey, G.(1973) Visitor Perception of Wilderness Recreation Carrying Capacity. USDA Forest Service Research Paper INT-142.
  15. Stedman, R.C.(2002) Toward a social psychology of place: Predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitude and identity. Environment and Behavior 34(5): 561-581. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916502034005001
  16. Theodori, G.L.(2004) Exploring the association between length of residence and community attachment: A research note. Southern Rural Sociology 20(1): 107-122.
  17. Um, S. and J.L. Crompton(1987) Measuring resident's attachment levels in a host community. Journal of Travel Research 26: 27-29.
  18. Vaske, J.J. and K.C. Kobrin(2001) Place attachment and environmentally responsible behavior. The Journal of Environmental Education 32(4): 16-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960109598658