4.7 Article

Delivering Tourism Sustainability and Competitiveness in Seaside and Marine Resorts with GIS

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jmse9030312

关键词

Baltic Sea; Delphi technique; GIS; seaside and marine resorts; Sustainable Development Goals

资金

  1. Interreg South Baltic Program 2014-2020 [STHB.04.01.00-22-0111/17]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study focuses on identifying the necessary conditions and potential for ensuring both the sustainability and competitiveness of seaside and marine resorts, using Karkle, Lithuania as an example. Through a benchmarking study and the application of a geographical information system, the main deficiencies of Karkle as an international scale resort were identified and addressed. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of combining tourism benchmarking, integrated coastal management, maritime spatial planning, and GIS to ensure sustainability and competitiveness in seaside and marine resorts.
In 2015, the United Nations General Assembly identified 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be achieved by the year 2030. The study's main objective is to identify the necessary conditions and potential for ensuring both the sustainability and competitiveness of tourism in seaside and marine resorts located in or at coastal and marine protected areas on the example of Karkle (Lithuania). Based on the results of a benchmarking study of five South Baltic resorts using the Delphi technique, the survey team identified the main deficiencies of Karkle as a seaside and marine resort of an international scale. We address the deficiencies by applying a geographical information system as a decision-support tool for the Littoral Regional Park where Karkle is located. We conclude that for ensuring both the sustainability and competitiveness of tourism in seaside and marine resorts, it is expedient to combine the Delphi-based tourism benchmarking with integrated coastal management and maritime spatial planning, for which GIS is an indispensable tool.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据