A Quantitative Evaluation Framework for Scenic Area Development Planning from the Perspective of Sustainable Tourism

Junting Huo; Mingchen Sun

doi:10.54097/tmre1087

Authors

Junting Huo
Mingchen Sun

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54097/tmre1087

Keywords:

Sustainable Development, Tourism Scenic Area Planning, Comprehensive Evaluation.

Abstract

Based on the United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), this study constructs a quantitative evaluation framework for the sustainable development of scenic areas, encompassing economic, environmental, and social dimensions. In the economic dimension, indicators such as tourism revenue growth rate, capital investment, and labor input are used to measure the economic contribution of scenic areas. The environmental dimension assesses the ecological impact through indicators including carbon emissions, water resource consumption, and waste discharge. The social dimension evaluates the effects of tourism activities on society using indicators such as community participation, resident well-being, and social negative effects. Data sources include questionnaire surveys, government statistics, and field investigations, with expert interviews employed to determine weight coefficients. The weight allocation follows an expert scoring method, assigning weights based on the importance of each indicator. A mathematical model is then developed to calculate the Sustainable Tourism Index (STI), defining different STI value intervals for scenic areas. The findings provide a quantitative basis for policymakers to formulate scientifically sound tourism planning strategies, ensuring that scenic areas balance economic growth with environmental protection and social well-being, thereby promoting the practical application and implementation of SDGs in scenic area development planning.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] WANG X S. Sustainable development strategy to promote economic development through green tourism[J]. Business Exhibition Economy, 2024(18): 47-50.

[2] YANG Y T, ZHAO Y Z, XIAO J N. Research progress and prospects of overtourism[J]. Tourism Tribune, 2021, 36(11): 1394-1399.

[3] SHAO C F, CHEN S H, GAO J L, et al. Design of China’s sustainable development evaluation index system based on SDGs[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2021, 31(4): 1-12.

[4] FARMARKI A, ALTINAY L, BOTERO I, et al. Tourism and stakeholder theory: Towards a multi-stakeholder approach[J]. Annals of Tourism Research, 2020, 84: 102991.

[5] ZHANG C Z, ZHOU X F. Research on tourism benefit-sharing mechanism from the perspective of community empowerment[J]. Tourism Science, 2023, 37(1): 12-24.

[6] ZHOU X F, ZHANG C Z. A comparative and reflective study on the connotation of sustainable tourism between China and the West[J]. Tourism Forum, 2023, 16(1): 43-52.

[7] BRAMWELL B, LANE B. What drives research on sustainable tourism?[J]. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2015, 23(1): 1-3.

[8] DODDS R, BUTLER R. The implementation of sustainable tourism: A 20-year perspective[J]. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2022, 30(2-3): 203-222.

[9] WANG N, YANG P, CHEN G D. Construction of a sustainable development evaluation model for scenic areas from the perspective of ecological civilization[J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(8): 1558-1570.

[10] GÖSSLING S, SCOTT D, HALL C M. Pandemics, tourism and global change: A rapid assessment of COVID-19[J]. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2021, 29(1): 1-20.

[11] LI H, WANG L, CHEN X. Research on sustainable development evaluation of scenic areas from the perspective of ecological priority[J]. Tourism Science, 2022, 38(3): 45-58.

[12] ZHANG Q, LIU Y, ZHAO M. Research on the collaborative path of scenic spatial planning and ecological protection based on GIS[J]. Resources Science, 2021, 43(5): 1023-1035.

[13] HALL C M, SCOTT D, GÖSSLING S. Pandemics, transformations and tourism: Be careful what you wish for[J]. Tourism Geographies, 2020, 22(3): 577-598.