Ecotourism branding in protected areas of Iran: Using an efficient hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method model

被引:4
|
作者
Tajer, Elnaz [1 ]
Demir, Sara [1 ]
机构
[1] Bursa Tech Univ, Fac Forestry, Dept Landscape Architecture, Bursa, Turkiye
关键词
Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP); Best and Worst Method (BWM); ecotourism branding of protected areas; hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method (MCDM); Iran; quantitative SWOT analysis; NATIONAL-PARK DJERDAP; SWOT; PRIORITIZATION; TOURISM; STRATEGIES; FRAMEWORK; ANP;
D O I
10.1002/jtr.2639
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Ecotourism, as a nature-based sustainable tourism, raises awareness about the protection of natural and cultural landscape values. This study aims to determine the ecotourism criteria to develop strategies for a sustainable ecotourism branding in Golestan, located in the northeast of Iran. To reach this aim, Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT) analysis, multi-criteria decision-making methods consisting of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), and Best and Worst Method (BWM) were integrated. The most appropriate ecotourism strategies for the branding of the study area were ranked according to their priorities. The results of this study reveal that among the 5 main and 20 sub ecotourism criteria, "having natural protected areas," which is an opportunity, and "having ecological values," which is a strength, were determined as the highest priority strategies for ecotourism branding. The methods and results of this quantitative-based research present an exemplary hybrid model that prioritizes the strategies required for branding ecotourism in similar protected areas.
引用
收藏
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A MODEL BASED ON INFLUENCE DIAGRAMS FOR MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING
    Sedki, Karima
    Delcroix, Veronique
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TOOLS, 2012, 21 (04)
  • [42] Sustainability indicators for renewable energy systems using multi-criteria decision-making model and extended SWARA/ARAS hybrid method
    Ghenai, Chaouki
    Albawab, Mona
    Bettayeb, Maamar
    RENEWABLE ENERGY, 2020, 146 (580-597) : 580 - 597
  • [43] Sustainability Performance Index for Ranking Energy Storage Technologies using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model and Hybrid Computational Method
    Albawab, Mona
    Ghenai, Chaouki
    Bettayeb, Maamar
    Janajreh, Isam
    JOURNAL OF ENERGY STORAGE, 2020, 32
  • [44] A GIS-based Multi-criteria Decision-making Approach to Identify Site Attraction for Ecotourism Development in Ilam Province, Iran
    Ahmadi, Mehdi
    Darabkhani, Mohammad Faraji
    Ghanavati, Ezatollah
    TOURISM PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, 2015, 12 (02) : 176 - 189
  • [45] Hybrid Multi-Criteria Decision-Making for Marine SOx Scrubber Systems
    Jee, Jaehoon
    JOURNAL OF MARINE SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 2022, 10 (11)
  • [46] INTEGRITY MITIGATION PRIORITIZATION USING MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING
    Mehranfer, Mahsa
    Mejia, Juan
    Hassanien, Sherif
    Martin, James
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASME PRESSURE VESSELS AND PIPING CONFERENCE, 2019, VOL 7, 2019,
  • [47] Drone selection using multi-criteria decision-making methods
    Khan, Muhammad Sohaib
    Shah, Syed Irtiza Ali
    Javed, Ali
    Qadri, Nafees Mumtaz
    Hussain, Nadeem
    PROCEEDINGS OF 2021 INTERNATIONAL BHURBAN CONFERENCE ON APPLIED SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGIES (IBCAST), 2021, : 256 - 270
  • [48] Contrasting Voting, Multi-Criteria Decision-Making, and Collaborative Decision-Making Using Election Results
    Elste, James R.
    Schwieger, Travis
    Croasdell, David T.
    2015 48TH HAWAII INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEM SCIENCES (HICSS), 2015, : 3960 - 3970
  • [49] Evaluating and prioritizing the healthcare waste disposal center locations using a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method
    Beheshtinia, Mohammad Ali
    Bahrami, Fatemeh
    Fathi, Masood
    Asadi, Shahla
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2023, 13 (01)
  • [50] A Data Asset Quality Evaluation Model Based on a Multi-criteria Decision-making Method
    You J.
    Xu T.
    Tongji Daxue Xuebao/Journal of Tongji University, 2021, 49 (04): : 585 - 590