DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

경주국립공원 지구특성에 따른 이용자 관리 정책에 대한 인식 차이 분석

Analysis of User Perception Gap regarding User Management by the Characteristic of Districts in Gyeongju National Park

  • 이슬비 (국토연구원) ;
  • 손수항 (서울시립대학교 대학원 조경학과) ;
  • 강은지 (서울시립대학교 대학원 조경학과) ;
  • 김용근 (서울시립대학교 조경학과)
  • Lee, Seul Bee (Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements) ;
  • Son, Soo-Hang (Dept. of Landscape Architecture, Graduate School, The University of Seoul) ;
  • Kang, Eun-Jee (Dept. of Landscape Architecture, Graduate School, The University of Seoul) ;
  • Kim, Yong-Geun (Dept. of Landscape Architecture, The University of Seoul)
  • 투고 : 2015.06.02
  • 심사 : 2015.07.23
  • 발행 : 2015.08.31

초록

본 연구는 경주국립공원의 지구유형별 특성에 따른 관리정책에 대한 이용자의 인식 차이를 비교해 보고자 경주국립공원을 방문한 이용자를 대상으로 2012년 7월에서 8월까지 설문조사를 실시하였다. 경주국립공원 이용자의 특성, 이용행태, 공원관리정책에 대한 인식을 조사항목으로 설정하였다. 먼저, 경주국립공원 8개 지구의 주요자원과 탐방객의 이용특성을 기준으로 지구유형을 분류하였다. 불국사와 석굴암을 주요 자원으로 주로 경관감상 및 휴양을 위한 관광을 목적으로 하는 이용객들이 많이 찾는 토함산 지구는 관광형, 역사문화 학습과 환경 교육을 위한 탐방객들이 많이 찾는 남산과 대본지구는 역사문화교육형으로 분류할 수 있었으며, 남은 화랑, 서악, 소금강, 구미산 지구는 건강증진을 위한 체력 단련, 등산, 산책이 주목적으로 주민들이 많이 이용하는 공간으로 근린공원형으로 분류할 수 있었다. 관광형의 경우, 문화유적탐방을 위한 이용자가 집중되는 곳으로 이용자제한 정책을 통해 탐방객들의 만족도를 높일 수 있는 방안에 대해 고려해야 할 것으로 판단되었고, 역사문화교육형은 이용행위규제 방법에서 관리자 단속권한이 강화될 필요성이 있다고 인식하고 있었다. 반면, 근린공원형 지구의 이용자들은 대부분의 정책에 대해 가장 낮은 필요도를 느끼고 있었는데, 이러한 결과들을 통해 경주국립공원은 각 지구별로 이용자들이 느끼는 정책의 필요도가 다르다는 것을 알 수 있었다. 이러한 결과는 향후 경주국립공원의 지구별 이용자의 인식 차이를 반영한 정책 도입에 기초자료로 활용할 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

The survey was taken from July to August 2012 by users who visited Gyeongju National Park to compare the perceived gap of users regarding management policy by characteristic of Gyeongju National Park district type in this study. Gyeongju National Park users' characteristic, use pattern and perception regarding park management policy were created as survey items. First, district type was classified based on use pattern of the visitor and the key resources of 8 districts in Gyeongju National Park. Tohamsan District, which has many visitors for the purpose of scenery appreciation and recreation with Bulguksa and Seokguram Grotto, is classified as tourism type, Namsan and Daebon District, which bring in many visitors seeking to learn about historical culture and environmental education, could be classified as historical culture education types, and Hwarang, Seoak, Sogeum River, Gumisan District are places residents use for physical training, hiking and walking to improve health, thus classifying them as neighborhood park types. People perceived that the tourism type is where users for historical artifact tours are concentrated, thus consideration for plans that can improve visitors' satisfaction from a user limit policy is required, and a manager's right to control use behavior must be reinforced in historical culture education types. On the other hand, users of neighborhood parks found the lowest necessity for most of the policy, and this showed that users of each of Gyeongju National Park's districts felt differently about the need for policies. This result is expected to be utilized as a database for introducing policy that reflects the perception of users in each districts of Gyeongju National Park in the future.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. An, S. L. and J. K. Park(2000) Coleoptera from Kyeongju National Park. Korean Journal of Soil Zoology 5(2): 133-137.(in Korean with English abstract)
  2. Chang, S. M.(1993) A Study on Satisfaction of Tourist Behavior Characteristics: With a Focus on the Attributes of Kyongju's National Park. Master's Thesis, Sejong University, Korea.(in Korean with English abstract)
  3. Cho, K. H.(1995) In case of facilities-zone in National Park Kaeryong Mountain: National park damage by wrong zonal plans and the prevention against damage. Journal of Regional Development 3(1): 117-145.(in Korean with English abstract)
  4. Choi, Y. G.(1998) User management of natural resources recreation. Planning and Policy 200: 132-139.(in Korean)
  5. Han, S. I.(1991) A study on reasonable management programs of Kyungju National Park. Journal of Tourism Study 1(0): 255-267.(in Korean with English abstract)
  6. Kang, E. J.(2009) A Study on the Instruction Plan of User Management for the Efficient Management in Tourism Destination, Master's Thesis, University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea. 186pp.(in Korean with English abstract)
  7. Kim, J. M.(2007) Research on visitor behavior and satisfaction with the nature Trailin Hallasan National Park. J. Env. Eco. 21(3): 223-234.(in Korean with English abstract)
  8. Kim, K. W., S. J. Yom and Y. J. Kim(2008) Physico-chemical characteristics of visibility impairment at the national park area of Gyeongju during Asian dust stormevents. Korean Society for Atmospheric Environment. 262-263.(in Korean)
  9. Kim, S. D.(2008) A Study on Distribution Characteristics of Birds in Gyeongju National Park. Master's Thesis, Dongguk University, Seoul, Korea, 79pp.(in Korean with English abstract)
  10. Kim, Y. G.(2004) 21c City Park's Paradigm.(in Korean)
  11. Korea Natinal Park Research Institute(2010) A Study of the National Park Exploring Usage Patterns.(in Korean)
  12. Korea National Park Service(2000) A Study of the National Park Management Plan in Accordance with Characteristic.(in Korean)
  13. Korea National Park Service(2007) Study on Establishing Long-term Development Plan of National Park.(in Korean)
  14. Korea National Park Service(2012a) National Park Service Statistics.(in Korean)
  15. Korea National Park Service(2012b) The 1st Gyeongju National Park Maintenance Management Plan.(in Korean)
  16. Lee, C. I., C. U. Chung and C. Y. Kim(2009) Analyse the winter season home range of Felis catus resided in Gyeongju National Park of Korea. J. Env. Eco. 23(5): 485-491.(in Korean with English abstract)
  17. Lee, D. B.(2008) Study of the Plans of Practical Use of Kyungjoo's Cultural Properties: Focusing on Buddhist cultural properties. Master's Thesis, Dongkuk University, Seoul, Korea, 106pp.(in Korean with English abstract)
  18. Lee, Y. K.(2008a) Evaluation of use satisfaction for Kyongju National Park - In case of Danseogsan, Soguemgansan, Namsan Chilbul. The Korea Institute of Forest Recreation Welfare 12(1): 1-10.(in Korean with English abstract)
  19. Lee, Y. K.(2008b) Evaluation of use satisfaction for Tohamsan and Namsan National Park in Kyongju: Focused on importance-performance analysis. Environmental Impact Assessment 17(3): 153-165.(in Korean with English abstract)
  20. Ministry of Environment and Korea National Park Service(2002) National Park Strengthening the Role of the Five-day Workweek Introduced.(in Korean)
  21. Ministry of Environment(2010) Three Decades of Environmental Policies in Korea. Korea, 125pp.(in Korean)
  22. Province of Gyeongju(2005) Gyeongju National Park Management Plan.(in Korean)
  23. Ministry of Environment and Hankookeng Co., Ltd.(2000) The Feasibility Report of Gyeongju National Park Plan.(in Korean)
  24. Mun, S. J., J. H. You, K. P. Hong and S. H. Heo(2013) Analysis of deterioration status on the trails in the Gyeongju National Park: Focused on Mt. Toham, Mt. Nam, Mt. Danseok and Mt. Gumi district. Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture 41(3): 31-42.(in Korean with English abstract) https://doi.org/10.9715/KILA.2013.41.3.031
  25. Shin, Y. J.(2000) A Proposal for the Improvement of Cultural National Park Plan: Focused on Kyung-Ju National Park. Master's Thesis, Kongju University, Korea, 46pp.(in Korean with English abstract)
  26. The Province of Gyeongju City(2005) Gyeongju National Park Management Plan. Gyeongju, Korea.(in Korean)