Problems of Outdoor Recreation: The Effect of Visitors’ Demographics on the Perceptions of Termessos National Park, Turkey

Problems of Outdoor Recreation: The Effect of Visitors’Demographics on the Perceptions of Termessos National Park,Turkey

Selcuk Sayan • Osman Karaguzel

Received: 11 April 2009 / Accepted: 27 April 2010 / Published online: 13 May 2010

� Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Abstract Visitor demographics, perceptions and their

relationships are investigated to determine the problems

and issues for outdoor recreation, which has been a

neglected part of the Turkish national park system, using

the case of Termessos National Park, located in the south

of Turkey. The park is attractive for both its historical and

natural resources. Five demographic characteristics (gen-

der, age, nationality, education level and income level)

were used to test perceptions of the park resources, pref-

erence for number of groups and perception of crowding.

The data was collected via a questionnaire survey admin-

istered on-site. Chi-square tests demonstrated that percep-

tions are significantly influenced by the nationality of

respondents. Archaeological ruins were perceived as the

most popular park resource, and were more appreciated by

the older age groups, French visitors and those with higher

education. Although the park was not perceived to be

crowded, at least 25% of all age groups and 30% of all

nationalities preferred not to encounter any other groups,

whereas a significant majority of Turkish visitors (over

95%) did not mind having one or two groups present

during their visit. Visitors with higher education and

income levels preferred to encounter fewer groups. At least

60% of the visitors were comfortable with the actual con-

dition of the park. The trails, signage and brochures were

considered major problems. As an integrated part of the

ruins, redesign of trails was perceived as necessary. Sign-

age was perceived to be the second most important

problem, which is also related to trails and orientation,

whereas brochures were suggested as supplementary

materials.

Keywords Visitor demographics � Visitor perceptions �Nationality � National park � Antalya � Termessos

Introduction

National park designation in Turkey began in 1956 with the

‘‘Forest Law’’. Nearly 30 years later, in 1983, the

‘‘National Parks Law’’ was adopted to establish the criteria

for the selection and designation of national parks, nature

parks, natural monuments and nature reserve areas of

national and international value (Resmi Gazete 1983), and

40 national parks have been designated to date with a total

area of 897,657 hectares (Ministry of Environment and

Forestry 2009). A long-term management plan for each

park was prepared to determine the conditions of access,

protection, development, management and services to be

provided within the park area (Anonymous 1969). How-

ever, the management plans were not utilized, and they

functioned only as inventory tools when needed (Cırık2007). They included nothing about visitors, their man-

agement or most of the recreational experiences available.

The demands of potential, or actual, visitors have never

been integrated into the Turkish national park system,

except in a recent circular (Cevre ve Orman Bakanlıgı2007), which was prepared to establish the rules for visitor

management and nature tours, but only from the resource

protection point of view. In fact, understanding visitor

characteristics, motivations and expectations is key to the

development of effective management policies (Eagles

and McCool 2002), and information on visitor attitudes,

S. Sayan (&) � O. Karaguzel

Akdeniz Universitesi, Ziraat Fakultesi, Peyzaj MimarlıgıBolumu, Antalya 07070, Turkey

e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

123

Environmental Management (2010) 45:1257–1270

DOI 10.1007/s00267-010-9500-8

preferences and perceptions can be useful for guiding

recreational management decisions (Obua and Harding

1996; Manning 1999).

Several authors have noted the need for collecting

information on visitors for recreation planning and man-

agement (Wagar 1963; Roggenbuck and Lucas 1987;

Watson and others 1992; Watson and others 2000; Verdın

and others 2008). In particular, the demographics and

perceptions of visitors (such as perceptions of crowding) at

different destinations can be used for park planning and

management and help to identify a range of problems and

issues for outdoor recreation. Both the educational level

and country of origin, chosen as a proxy for a visitor’s

cultural profile, might, to a significant extent, define a

visitor’s behavior, and in turn influence the sense of

crowding (Fleishman and others 2004). In the absence of

base information, a range of problems may occur. For

example, inadequate toilet facilities could create problems

for people of different gender or age; steep slopes can be a

problem for older or disabled visitors; language used on

signs may not be comprehended by visiting nationalities;

crowding may threaten the integrity of natural and cultural

resources and reduce the quality of the experience (Lawson

and others 2003). Commonly measured visitor attributes

include socio-demographic characteristics, level of expe-

rience, knowledge of environmental conditions and park

regulations and various attitudes towards management

practices, services and environmental conditions (Eagles

and McCool 2002).

Research on visitor perceptions and preferences has

focused on many aspects of recreation, in particular

crowding (Chavez 1993; Hughes and Vogelsong 2003;

Fleishman and others 2004; Grieser and others 2005; Oku

and Fukamachi 2006; Arnberger and Brandenburg 2007;

Arnberger and Haider 2007; Kalisch and Klaphake 2007;

Leujak and Ormond 2007; Arnberger and Mann 2008) and

the environmental impact (Noe and others 1997; Hillery

and others 2001; Priskin 2003; Kyle and others 2004;

Moore and Polley 2007; Petrosillo and others 2007). A few

studies have investigated the relationship between demo-

graphic characteristics, perceptions and preferences. The

demographics and visitors’ perceptions can be analyzed

separately. However, investigating the possible relation-

ships between them, or the influence of demographic

characteristics on perceptions, can help to inform further

studies of the recreation management process because

human perception is not only a function of psychological

factors, such as personal values, goals, attitudes, expecta-

tions and motivations, but also a result of demographic

characteristics and the socioeconomic background of the

participants (Pigram and Jenkins 1999).

Previous research that addressed the influence of visitors’

socio-demographic characteristics (age, sex, education) and

visitation patterns (duration of visit, number of past visits

and group size) on their tolerance for crowding in recrea-

tional settings has not found any statistically significant

relationship (Absher and Lee 1981; Vaske and others 1996;

Manning 1999; Kim and Shelby 2008). However Fleish-

man and others (2004) found that visitors’ socio-demo-

graphic and cultural attributes directly affected their

perception of crowding, and, in particular, the age and

ethnic origin of a visitor have been shown to have statis-

tically significant effects on sensitivity to crowding. Leujak

and Ormond (2007) found that perceptions about crowding

and the environment in South Sinai, Egypt showed sig-

nificant differences among different nationalities. Priskin

(2003) also found that visitor age, education, country of

origin and income group most significantly affected per-

ceptions for marine-based recreation in Western Australia.

The assumption within this paper is that the socio-

demographic characteristics of visitors, in terms of

nationality, age, gender, education level and income level,

can all influence perceptions of crowding, park resources

and overall recreational experience to varying degrees, and

that sophisticated data can provide a better understanding

of outdoor recreation and help to analyze the problems and

issues faced by different recreation areas. Visitor studies

for Turkish national parks could provide a wide variety of

information. Although some problems with management,

facilities and infrastructure have been mentioned by park

authorities, none of these have been reported or published

anywhere. Except for a few studies (Gunduz and Akpınar

2002; Muderrisoglu 2002; Atik and others 2009) on some

issues of visitors use, no comprehensive research con-

cerning visitors has been carried out in any Turkish

national parks to date. Therefore, the present study not only

addresses the need for visitor information but also aims to

provide better quality recreational experiences for visitors.

Termessos National Park was selected for study because of

the significance of its cultural and natural resources and

international visitor profile. A group of scientists‘ and park

authorities’ observations in the park revealed that

encountering and crowding seemed to be potential prob-

lems associated with ineffective recreational planning and

management, even though the average annual visitor

numbers are relatively low (Anonymous 2003). Also, the

majority of visitors to the park are European tourists who

have higher expectations for recreational activities, based

upon prior experiences. The study’s specific objectives are

as follows:

• To investigate the relationship between demographic

characteristics and park resources, preference for

groups and perception of crowding

• To evaluate visitors’ suggestions for the provision of

better facilities

1258 Environmental Management (2010) 45:1257–1270

123

• To determine the range and type of issues facing

outdoor recreation in Termessos National Park.

Study Area

Termessos National Park is located 34 km northwest of the

city of Antalya (Fig. 1), the leading tourist destination in

Turkey. The park is situated in steep, mountainous topog-

raphy, ranging from 250 to 1663 m (Eren Hill) above sea

level, with an area of 6,702 ha. The area was designated as

a national park in 1970 mainly for its archaeological her-

itage (Anonymous 1998). However, the cultural and natural

resources are equally important. The cultural resources of

the site focus on the ancient Roman city of Termessos,

which was established prior to 334 B.C. (Akurgal 2000)

(Fig. 2). The natural characteristics of the park, such as

natural vegetation, fauna and habitats, are also highly

valued (Alcıtepe 1998; Sert 2000; Cıplak and others 1999).

Public visits to the park informally began in 1970, and

today entrance is controlled using tickets. The majority of

visitors to the park are foreign tourists (Table 1) who are

likely to visit in groups for around 3–4 h. The highest

visitation occurs during the spring and autumn months

because of the lower and more comfortable daytime tem-

peratures. Bigger groups tend to visit a limited number of

archaeological sites within the park, whereas smaller

groups and individuals are more likely to tour the site in

detail. These sites can only be accessed from a network of

trails, which begin at the car park. Within the scope of this

study, four main trails were identified according to their

final destination (Fig. 3). Trail 1 leads to the theatre and its

surroundings (gymnasium, odeon, agora and cisterns),

Trail 2 connects the rock tombs, Trail 3 leads to Alcetas’

tomb and Trail 4 leads to the southern cemetery. The total

length of the trails is around 3 km, each with combinations

of gentle, moderate and steeply sloping sections. Therefore,

recreation in the park is experienced primarily along a

number of linear segments, which are around 1 m in width.

The theatre, being the most dominant feature, is the major

gathering, resting and viewing point, and is located on the

edge of a cliff facing outwards over the landscape.Fig. 1 Location of Termessos National Park

Fig. 2 The theatre: one of the

most important ruins in

Termessos (2007)

Table 1 Number of visitors to Termessos National Park in the period

of 1995–2008 (Anonymous 2009)

Year Visitor number

Locals Foreigners Total

1995 N/A N/A 27,700

1996 N/A N/A 33,300

1997 N/A N/A 37,300

1998 N/A N/A 36,600

1999 N/A N/A 21,600

2000 1,808 21,579 23,387

2001 4,181 27,055 31,236

2002 5,510 28,575 34,085

2003 4,046 19,240 23,286

2004 5,556 22,035 27,591

2005 7,783 24,786 32,569

2006 7,954 19,554 27,508

2007 3,487 19,761 23,248

2008 2,320 20,910 23,230

Grand total 402,640

Environmental Management (2010) 45:1257–1270 1259

123

Methodology

The perception of the park resources, preference for

number of groups and perception of crowding, together

with five demographic characteristics (gender, age,

nationality, education level and income level), were ana-

lyzed. Data were collected using a systematic questionnaire

survey, which was administered on-site on randomly

selected days during the autumn of 2003 and spring of

2004, periods known to be the peak use seasons.

Due to the visitation-oriented nature of the study,

exploring experiences and perceptions is only meaningful

after the visit has taken place, so the questionnaires were

administered by face-to-face interview with visitors after

their visit, on their return to the car park. According to the

sample size table provided by Arkin and Colton (1968), to

have ±5% margin of error, a questionnaire should be

applied to a sample of at least 397 visitors, based on the

total average of annual visitors. The annual mean number

of visitors to Termessos National Park in the period 1995–

2008 was calculated at 28,760 (from ticket receipts), and

this amplitude refers to a place between 25,000 and 50,000

in the sample size table. To have a safe margin, the

amplitude of 50,000 was used. In order to minimize the

problem of missing data (particularly for the level of

income, which some people were unwilling to provide, and

which invalidated some questionnaires), the questionnaire

was administered to 500 randomly selected volunteer

respondents, and of these, 455 were properly completed

without missing data or errors, which is well above the

target minimum sample size of 397.

The questionnaire form was prepared in two languages,

English and Turkish. However, the majority of forms were

completed by foreign tourists, using the English version, due

to their dominance (more than 80%) among the total pool of

visitor numbers. Respondents were asked twenty closed

questions and one open-ended question, which included their

profile, perceptions, preferences and individual opinions.

Questions were classified under the following topics:

(a) Socio-demographic characteristics:

• Gender; marital status; age; nationality; education

level; job; monthly individual income; place of

residence (country)

(b) Actual visitation conditions:

• How they travelled to the park (car, bus,

motorcycle, bicycle, other)

• Where they obtained their information about the

park (books, pamphlets, internet, tourist informa-

tion offices, media sources, tourism agency,

friends, other)

• With how many people they visited the park

• How long they stayed at the park (1–2, 3–4, 5–6,

7–8 h)

(c) Perceptions of the park and crowding:

• Most appreciated resource of the park (archaeo-

logical ruins, landscape, plants-flora, animals-

fauna, other)

• How many people and groups they encountered

during the visit (people: 0–50, 50–100, 100–200,

more than 200), (groups: none, 1–2, 3–4, 5–10,

more than 10)

• How many groups they would prefer to encounter

(none, 1–2, 3–4, 5–10, more than 10, no problem)

• Perception of crowding during their visit (not

crowded, slightly crowded, crowded, very crowded)

• Perception of the most crowded part of the park,

e.g., gymnasium, theatre, odeon, agora and cis-

terns, Alcetas’ Tomb, rock tombs and southern

cemetery

• How they rated the quality of their visit (poor, fair,

good, very good)

(d) Contributions of respondents

• Open-ended question to elicit a variety of com-

plaints about the site and their experience as well

as suggestions.

Frequencies of each category and mean scores for the

perception of crowding were calculated. Perception of

Fig. 3 The trails network of Termessos National Park


123

crowding was answered using a verbal ranking (from not

crowded to very crowded) that was converted into a

numerical scale. Three levels of analysis were carried out

as follows:

• The relationship of each demographic characteristic to

the most appreciated resource of the park, preference

for number of groups and perception of crowding were

investigated using chi-square tests as the first level of

analysis. The variable of gender was excluded from the

results section, because no significant relationships

were uncovered.

• Secondly, a correlation-based Principal Component

Analysis (PCA) was carried out to investigate which

demographic variables had the most influence on the

differences in the significant perceptions and prefer-

ences, namely: preference for number of groups (none),

perception of crowding (not crowded) and quality of

visit (very good).

• Finally, the relationships between the respondents’

strongest preference and perceptions (resource and

crowding) and the most dominant four visit character-

istics were further analyzed, separately, through curve

estimation results based on nationality; there were

significant differences in the preferences and percep-

tions of Turkish and European visitors. The strongest

preferences and perceptions were taken as independent

variables, and the most dominant visit characteristics

were taken as dependent variables. The relationship

between four dependent variables (group size, duration

of visit, number of people encountered, number of

groups encountered) and three independent variables

(preference for ‘‘no groups’’, perception of the condi-

tion of the park as being ‘‘not crowded’’ and perception

of the visit quality as ‘‘very good’’) were investigated.

Curve estimations are useful to investigate the rela-

tionships, which are not necessarily linear, to see which

significant relationships are created by the influence of

dependent variables on each independent variable.

SPSS Version 13.0 and Excel XP were used for the

analyses, and only statistically significant differences are

reported.

Results

Demographic Characteristics

Of the 455 visitors participating in the questionnaire sur-

vey, 56.0% (255) were male and 44.0% (200) female.

Respondents of 18–35 years old constituted the largest age

category, followed by 51–65 and 36- to 50-year-old visitors

(Table 2). The majority of respondents were German

(22.6%), followed by Belgian, French, Turkish, and Dutch

nationals. Based on the previous observations and talks

with visitors, Termessos National Park visitors were gen-

erally assumed to be well-educated, middle- and high-

income individuals. The results supported that assumption.

The educational level of the respondents was quite high,

with 61.6% having a university or higher degree, and

income level was also high; more than one-fifth of the

respondents earned more than 5,000 € per month, and more

than one-fourth (26.6%) earned 3,000–5,000 € per month

per individual (Table 2).

Age

Many significant differences were found between the age

categories of respondents and the perception of the park

resources, preference for number of groups and perception

of crowding. Differences were found for the degree of

interest in archaeological ruins (v2 = 60.6, P \ 0.001)

and landscape (v2 = 19.5, P \ 0.001), according to the

age of respondents (Table 3). The ruins were most

Table 2 Respondents’ demographic characteristics (n = 455)

Variable No. No. (%)

Gender

Male 255 56.0

Female 200 44.0

Age

18–35 156 34.3

36–50 132 29.0

51–65 135 29.7

Over 65 32 7.0

Nationality

German 103 22.6

Belgian 90 19.8

French 56 12.3

Turkish 41 9.0

Dutch 32 7.0

Others 133 29.3

Education Level

Primary education 23 5.1

High school—Lycee 152 33.4

University B.Sc. 170 37.4

University M.Sc./Ph.D. 110 24.2

Income

Less than 1,000 € 35 7.7

1,000–2,000 € 107 23.5

2,000–3,000 € 93 20.4

3,000–5,000 € 121 26.6

More than 5,000 € 99 21.8


123

appreciated by middle-aged groups and older people,

whereas landscape scenes were appreciated most by the

younger groups.

Age seemed to be the most influential factor on the

preference for the number of groups encountered during

the visit for most visitors (Table 3). The 36–50-age cate-

gory had the greatest percentage for both none (28.0%) and

1 or 2 groups (29.5%). The average percentage of

respondents who do not want to see anybody during their

visit was high, more than 25%. Older respondents’ (over

65) preference for many groups was the highest (21.8%)

among all the age categories, although the difference

between age groups in this regard was not significant. The

majority of respondents (almost 78%) indicated they did

not perceive that Termessos National Park was too crow-

ded, showing significant differences for different age

categories (v2 = 63.8, P \ 0.001). However, 13% of

respondents, across all age groups, found the park crowded

(Table 3).

Nationality

People from a total of 28 nationalities were interviewed.

The majority of the respondents (61.7%) were from

European Union countries, probably because of the con-

ventional tourism promotion strategies primarily targeting

the European market. Only 0.8% of the respondents were

Russian, even though they have been the second largest

group visiting Turkey since 2003 (Ministry of Culture and

Tourism 2008).

The numbers of respondents by nationality were ranked

according to their percentages above and below five per-

cent of the total. The five nationalities (German, Belgian,

French, Turkish and Dutch) were analyzed separately, and

the rest of the nationalities were grouped together. Per-

ceptions of the archaeological ruins differed with nation-

ality (v2 = 97.9, P \ 0.001) (Table 4). They were most

appreciated by the French (85.7%) and least by the Dutch

respondents (71.9%). Conversely, the landscape was

Table 3 Relationship between age and perceptions of the most appreciated resource of the park, preference for number of groups and perception

of crowding

Age categories Chi-square P Value

18–35 36–50 51–65 Over 65

Most appreciated resource of the park

Archaeological ruins 78.3 80.3 80.7 87.5 60.6 \0.001

Landscape 18.0 12.1 14.8 9.4 19.5 \0.001

Plants 0.6 1.5 3.0 3.1 3.0 0.392

Animals 0.6 2.3 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.317

Other 1.9 3.8 1.5 0.0 1.4 0.497

Chi-square 354.4 304.7 229.5 42.4

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001

Preference for number of groups

None 27.6 28.0 25.9 25.0 23.6 \0.001

1 or 2 groups 25.6 29.5 28.9 12.5 30.7 \0.001

3 or 4 groups 16.0 18.9 23.0 18.8 16.3 \0.001

5–10 groups 18.6 12.1 11.9 18.8 15.9 \0.001

More than 10 groups 3.2 5.3 1.5 3.1 6.1 0.108

No problem 9.0 6.1 8.9 21.8 3.2 0.446

Chi-square 41.5 44.5 47.7 5.9

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 0.319

Perception of crowding

Mean 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4

1 (not crowded) 75.6 79.5 79.3 75.0 63.8 \0.001

2 (very few crowded) 7.8 7.6 3.7 9.4 7.1 0.070

3 (crowded) 14.7 10.6 13.3 12.5 13.2 0.004

4 (very crowded) 1.9 2.3 3.7 3.1 2.7 0.446

Chi-square 218.5 211.3 215.3 43.3

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001


123

preferred more by the Dutch than the French. Respondents’

preference for number of groups also differed according to

the nationality, such as for none (v2 = 56.5, P \ 0.001),

for 1 or 2 groups (v2 = 40.7, P \ 0.001), and for 3 or 4

groups (v2 = 21.1, P \ 0.001) (Table 4); Dutch respon-

dents were the largest group (37.5%) that preferred to see

no other groups in the park. Turkish respondents’ prefer-

ence for ‘‘none’’ was quite low (2.4%), which demonstrates

a clear difference in tolerance of encountering groups in the

park according to nationality. Additionally, 22.0% of

Turkish respondents preferred more than 10 groups, which

is the highest figure over all the nationality categories.

However, overall preferences of Turkish respondents for

the number of groups were uneven: 2.4% for ‘‘none’’;

22.0% for 1 or 2 groups; 9.7% for 3 or 4 groups; 36.6% for

5–10 groups; 22.0% for [10 groups and 7.3% for ‘‘no

problem’’. Differences were significant between nationali-

ties only for the ‘‘not crowded’’ category (v2 = 104.7,

P \ 0.001) (Table 4).

Education Level

Educational level was classified under four categories:

‘‘Primary education’’ (including primary and secondary

schools), ‘‘High school’’, ‘‘University B.Sc.’’ and ‘‘Uni-

versity M.Sc./Ph.D.’’. Different educational levels showed

significant differences in the perception of park resources

particularly for archaeological ruins (v2 = 91.6, P \0.001) and landscape (v2 = 28.8, P \ 0.001). The ruins

and landscape were inversely appreciated according to the

educational level: The ruins were perceived as the most

important park resource by the university B.Sc. and above

graduates, whereas landscape was appreciated by those

with primary and high school education (Table 5).

There were also significant differences in preference for

the number of groups according to different educational

background, such as for ‘‘none’’ (v2 = 38.7, P \ 0.001),

for ‘‘1 or 2 groups’’ (v2 = 27.8, P \ 0.001), and for ‘‘3 or 4

groups’’ (v2 = 27.7, P \ 0.001). In general, the percentage

Table 4 Relationship between nationality and perceptions of the most appreciated resource of the park, preference for number of groups and

perception of crowding

Nationality Chi-square P value

German Belgian French Turkish Dutch Others


Archaeological ruins 78.6 75.6 85.7 73.2 71.9 87.2 97.9 \0.001

Landscape 14.6 21.1 10.7 12.2 25.0 10.5 11.9 0.036

Plants 2.9 1.1 0.0 2.4 3.1 1.5 2.0 0.736

Animals 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.3 0.0 0.8 1.0 0.317

Other 3.9 2.2 3.6 4.9 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.753

Chi-square 161.5 131.0 69.6 74.6 23.7 277.7

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001


None 32.0 15.5 35.7 2.4 37.5 32.3 56.5 \0.001

1 or 2 groups 23.3 41.1 21.4 22.0 21.9 24.8 40.7 \0.001

3 or 4 groups 21.4 25.6 25.0 9.7 15.6 14.3 21.1 \0.001

5–10 groups 16.5 7.8 12.5 36.6 9.4 13.5 17.6 0.003

More than 10 groups 2.9 0.0 0.0 22.0 0.0 2.3 4.8 0.091

No problem 3.9 10.0 5.4 7.3 15.6 12.8 19.4 0.002

Chi-square 40.5 36.5 15.3 16.9 7.4 43.9

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 0.005 0.117 \0.001


Mean 1.3 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.3

1 (not crowded) 87.4 63.3 73.2 75.6 71.8 84.2 104.7 \0.001

2 (very few crowded) 1.0 12.2 8.9 12.2 9.4 3.8 11.2 0.048

3 (crowded) 9.7 20.0 14.3 12.2 12.5 10.5 10.3 0.068

4 (very crowded) 1.9 4.5 3.6 0.0 6.3 1.5 1.3 0.856

Chi-square 215.6 77.5 70.7 29.2 37.8 251.0

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 0.005 0.117 \0.001


123

of respondents with a higher educational background pre-

ferred to encounter fewer or no groups than those with a

lower educational background, and, particularly, the uni-

versity B.Sc. graduates mainly preferred for there to be no

other groups (31.2%), whereas those with a high school

education preferred 3 or 4 groups (24.3%). Preference for

5–10 groups decreased as the level of education increased,

but not significantly so. Differences were significant for the

perception of ‘‘not crowded’’ (v2 = 88.9, P \ 0.001) and

‘‘crowded’’ conditions (v2 = 17.3, P = 0.001) according

to different educational backgrounds (Table 5).

Income Level

Respondents’ monthly income level was broken down into

five categories. However, people frequently refused to

answer this question. Significant differences emerged for

the perception of archaeological ruins (v2 = 40.4,

P \ 0.001) (Table 6), which were mainly preferred by the

higher income categories. Also, significant differences

were found for the preference for number of groups such as

for ‘‘none’’ (v2 = 20.9, P \ 0.001) and for ‘‘3 or 4 groups’’

(v2 = 24.2, P \ 0.001). The respondents with the highest

income level appreciated lower levels of crowding in the

park the most (36.3%). The respondents with a monthly

income level of 3,000–5,000 Euros primarily preferred 3 or

4 groups in the park at a time. Finally, differences were

significant for the park’s ‘‘not crowded’’ condition

(v2 = 41.8, P \ 0.001) (Table 6).

Influence of Demographic Characteristics

A PCA was undertaken to help visualize the structure of

the data. Three PCA graphs were produced to explore

which demographic variables were most influential on

respondents‘ significant preferences and perceptions:

namely, preference for number of groups (none), per-

ception of crowding (not crowded) and quality of visit

(very good). For the PCA influencing visitors’ preference

for number of groups, ‘‘none’’ produced a principal

Table 5 Relationship between education level and perceptions of the most appreciated resource of the park, preference for number of groups

and perception of crowding

Education level Chi-square P Value

Primary education High school/Lycee University B.Sc. University M.Sc./Ph.D.


Archaeological ruins 78.3 73.7 83.5 85.5 91.6 \0.001

Landscape 17.4 21.7 11.8 9.1 28.8 \0.001

Plants 0.0 3.3 1.2 0.9 3.3 0.197

Animals 0.0 0.0 0.6 2.7 1.0 0.317

Other 4.3 1.3 2.9 1.8 3.6 0.308

Chi-square 21.5 207.5 435.7 296.8

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001


None 21.7 23.7 31.2 26.4 38.7 \0.001

1 or 2 groups 30.5 22.4 27.6 30.9 27.8 \0.001

3 or 4 groups 13.0 24.3 15.3 19.1 27.7 \0.001

5–10 groups 30.4 15.1 14.1 11.8 12.0 0.007

More than 10 groups 0.0 4.6 3.5 1.8 2.8 0.247

No problem 4.4 9.9 8.3 10.0 12.0 0.007

Chi-square 5.9 30.5 59.4 39.0

P value 0.206 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001


Mean 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.2

1 (not crowded) 69.6 71.8 79.4 85.4 88.9 \0.001

2 (very few crowded) 4.3 7.9 5.3 7.3 8.7 0.034

3 (crowded) 26.1 16.4 11.8 7.3 17.3 0.001

4 (very crowded) 0.0 3.9 3.5 0.0 0.0 1.000

Chi-square 15.2 181.8 271.0 134.5

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001


123

component 1 (PC1) that explained 26.7% of the variation

(Eigenvalue 1.60) and principal component 2 (PC2) that

explained an additional 22.6% (Eigenvalue 1.36) (Fig. 4).

PC1 was positively influenced by the factors of income

(0.702) and education (0.625) and negatively influenced

by gender (-0.536) and marital status (-0.509).

Respondents with a higher income level and educational

background preferred to meet fewer or no groups. Female

respondents preferred none or fewer groups, whereas

males’ group preferences were irregular. PC2 was posi-

tively influenced by marital status (0.637) and negatively

influenced by age (-0.700).

Table 6 Relationship between income level and perceptions of the most appreciated resource of the park, preference for number of groups and

perception of crowding

Income level Chi-square P value

Less than 1,000 € 1,000–2,000 € 2,000–3,000 € 3,000–5,000 € More than 5,000 €


Archaeological ruins 85.7 75.7 72.0 84.3 86.9 40.4 \0.001

Landscape 11.4 18.7 20.4 11.6 10.1 13.1 0.011

Plants 0.0 2.8 2.2 2.5 0.0 0.3 0.882

Animals 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.8 2.0 0.5 0.779

Other 0.0 2.8 5.4 0.8 1.0 4.4 0.221

Chi-square 43.6 153.9 116.9 317.5 190.0

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001


None 22.8 25.2 20.4 27.3 36.3 20.9 \0.001

1 or 2 groups 17.1 29.0 31.1 24.0 27.3 17.7 0.001

3 or 4 groups 2.9 20.6 22.6 23.1 15.2 24.2 \0.001

5–10 groups 28.6 15.9 17.2 9.9 12.1 2.6 0.622

More than 10 groups 20.0 2.8 2.2 1.7 1.0 7.3 0.119

No problem 8.6 6.5 6.5 14.0 8.1 13.5 0.009

Chi-square 9.4 34.4 32.1 35.2 50.0

P value 0.094 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001


Mean 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.3

1 (not crowded) 74.3 76.7 72.0 80.2 82.8 41.8 \0.001

2 (very few crowded) 11.4 5.6 6.5 7.4 5.1 2.3 0.675

3 (crowded) 14.3 14.0 18.3 9.9 10.1 7.4 0.118

4 (very crowded) 0.0 3.7 3.2 2.5 2.0 0.7 0.881

Chi-square 26.5 154.7 114.4 197.8 177.9

P value \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001 \0.001

Fig. 4 PCA ordination of demographic factors influencing visitors’

preference for number of groups (none)Fig. 5 PCA ordination of demographic factors influencing visitors’

perception of crowding (not crowded)


123

For the PCA for demographic factors influencing visi-

tors’ perceptions of crowding, ‘‘not crowded’’ produced a

PC1 that explained 24.7% of the variation (Eigenvalue

1.48) and a PC2 that explained an additional 22.0%

(Eigenvalue 1.32) (Fig. 5). PC1 was positively influenced

by age (0.716) and negatively influenced by marital status

(-0.738). Although the majority of respondents found the

park not crowded, the youngest and oldest respondents’

perception of crowding was higher than the others. PC2

was positively influenced by education (0.711) and nega-

tively influenced by gender (-0.491). The majority of

respondents with a higher educational background found

the park ‘‘not crowded’’, as opposed to those with a lower

educational background. Also, the park was found ‘‘not

crowded’’ by more males than females.

For the final PCA for demographic factors influencing

visitor’s perceptions of the quality of visit, ‘‘very good’’

produced a PC1 that explained 27.5% of the variation

(Eigenvalue 1.64) and a PC2 that explained an additional

23.6% (Eigenvalue 1.41) (Fig. 6). PC1 was positively

influenced by the factors of age (0.698) and income (0.678)

and negatively influenced by marital status (-0.681). Older

respondents and those with the lowest and highest income

levels were more satisfied with their quality of visit. PC2

was positively influenced by education (0.640) and nega-

tively influenced by gender (-0.659).

The differences in the preferences and perceptions of

Turkish and European visitors were found to be significant

for this research. Therefore, we further analyzed the rela-

tionship between the respondents’ significant preferences

(number of groups: ‘‘none’’) and perceptions (perception of

crowding: ‘‘not crowded’’ and quality of visit: ‘‘very

good’’) and the four most dominant visit characteristics

(group size: 1–10; duration of visit: 3–4 h; number of

people encountered: 1–50; number of groups encountered:

1–2) in three separate graphs using curve estimation results

based on the six nationality categories. The three graphs

showed both linear and non-linear relationships. However,

the only significant relationship was between the prefer-

ence for the number of groups ‘‘none’’ and group size

(v2 = 0.901, P = 0.031). This means that with an increase

in group size by ‘‘1–10 people’’ for each nationality

Fig. 6 PCA ordination of demographic factors influencing visitors’

perception on quality of visit (very good)

Fig. 7 The relationship

between preference for number

of groups (none) and group size,

duration of visit, number of

people encountered, number of

groups encountered based on

the nationality


123

category, respondents’ preference for no group encounters

increased up to a certain percentage (37.5%) and decreased

thereafter (Fig. 7).

Contributions of Respondents

A final open-ended question was asked in order to elicit a

variety of complaints about the site and the respondents’

experience and any suggestions they might have. The

contributions of respondents were classified according to

the following topics:

• Trails. The condition of the trails received the most

complaints. Twenty percent of the respondents stated

that the trails should be redesigned to consider older

visitors. They stressed the slippery conditions of the

trails, steep slopes, confusing routes, poor drainage and

the need for cleaning and maintenance.

• Signage. Orientation based on the signage was seen as

another major problem of the park, especially for

people not on guided tours. Seventeen percent of the

respondents reported language problems and missing or

poorly designed signs (in terms of both visual and

spatial standards) on the trails and elsewhere.

• Brochures. No brochures or maps are distributed at the

entrance of the park. Twelve percent of respondents

suggested that brochures in different languages and a

map of the trails and sites, including the distances,

should be provided as a basic service.

• Kiosk. Seven percent of the respondents suggested that

a food and beverage kiosk would be a good addition,

and that some other items (souvenirs) could be sold in

the same place. The need for beverages is a serious

issue during the summer, although most visitors already

know of the situation and come prepared.

• Other Issues. Five percent of the suggestions were

about various miscellaneous issues, including the need

for better pre-information, archaeological excavations

and restoration, barriers and railings, plant maintenance

and identification tags, more toilets, litter bins, benches,

car park improvement, drinking fountains, etc.

Discussion

Since the establishment of Termessos National Park in

1970, the designation of new areas of outstanding natural,

historical, and recreational value for protection and use has

expanded throughout Turkey. However, national and local

authorities have been slow to revise their plans and to take

management action in the period since then. The findings

of this study demonstrated that the experience of outdoor

recreation in Termessos National Park is highly influenced

by demographic characteristics and perceptions of visitors.

Understanding these differences in the preferences and

perceptions of Turkish and foreign visitors could be used to

develop an integrated management system that considers

both resource protection and visitor experience. Visitor

information and a consideration of the recreational expe-

rience would be especially good additions to the develop-

ment of improved long-term management plans. The

following sections address the topics investigated in this

study.

Park Resources

The majority of respondents were highly impressed with

the historical resources in the park. Except for gender,

significant relationships were found between perceptions of

archaeological ruins and age, nationality, education level

and income level. The differences for age were also sig-

nificant for perceptions of the landscape. Although both the

younger and older age groups appreciated the ruins, older

people were significantly more interested than younger

ones. Conversely, younger respondents appreciated the

landscape twice as much as older respondents. Oku and

Fukamachi (2006), in a study of the visitors’ characteristics

and their choices regarding the perceptions of scenery,

found a similar relationship between younger peoples’

perception of landscape elements. The archaeological ruins

within the park area are the main reason for visiting Ter-

messos, which is confirmed by the perceptions of respon-

dents. Because the older, well-educated visitors are most

attracted to the ruins, the paths and information should be

designed with them in mind.

Number of Groups and Crowding

Crowding standards are influenced by visitor expectations

and characteristics, in addition to the behavior of those

encountered and the characteristics of the area (Manning

1985). In general, gender does not influence the preference

for number of groups and perception of crowding. How-

ever, the PCA results showed that gender is negatively

associated with encountering groups. Women visitors’

preference for number of groups was found to be lower

than that of men. Chang (1993), in a study of crowding in

Yangmingshan National Park in Taiwan, also found no

significant relationship between gender and perception of

crowding.

Age was found to be the most influential factor for the

preference for number of groups and, consequently, for

perception of crowding. At least 25.0% of all age catego-

ries preferred to encounter no other groups in the park,

whereas at least 75.0% of all categories found the park not

to be crowded. Almost one-fifth of the respondents older


123

than 65 reported that the number of groups at one time was

not an important issue for their visit.

One of the most interesting results of this study was the

difference between Turkish and European visitors’ prefer-

ence for number of groups and perception of crowding.

There was a considerable number of total respondents who

preferred there to be no other visitors in the park, whereas a

significant majority of Turkish visitors (97.6%) did not

mind at least 1 or 2 groups to be present during their visit.

Although this study is not concerned with the reasons for

this finding, it can still be generalized that major differ-

ences existed in the socio-cultural structure of Turkish and

European visitors that affects the perception of crowding,

and this was confirmed by our results.

Leujak and Ormond (2007) found that Egyptians were

not sensitive to crowding on the beaches of South Sinai; in

fact, most Egyptians preferred crowded beaches. On the

other hand, crowding of beaches may not be comparable to

archaeological sites, and Europeans also appear to tolerate

crowded beaches. However, Vaske and others (1996) found

few differences among visitors from five countries of ori-

gin, namely Canada, United States, Japan, Germany, and

England, for perceived crowding levels at the Columbia

Icefield in Jasper National Park, Alberta. Kim and Shelby

(2008) also found that demographics and past visitation did

not show strong relationships with a variety of standards,

including crowding. However, Fleishman and others

(2004) found that crowding perceptions appear to be

directly influenced by the cultural and socio-demographic

diversity of visitors and that younger, better educated vis-

itors of European or American descent are less tolerant of

crowding than those who are older and/or of Asian or

African descent.

Respondents’ educational level was also related with the

preference for number of groups, and, in general, the more

years of education, the stronger preference for fewer

groups. The relationship between perceived level of

crowding and education level is only significant when the

park is not crowded. Contrary to expectations, visitors of

higher educational level agreed more strongly about the

park’s low level of congestion than those of lower educa-

tional level. Chang (1993) also found no relationship

between perception of crowding and educational level.

Respondents’ perception of crowding was influenced by

income: Visitors of higher income were more agreed about

the park’s low level of congestion than those of lower

income categories.

At least 60.0% of the visitors were not concerned about

levels of crowding in the park. In addition, almost one-fifth

of visitors did not want to share their experience with any

other groups; they would prefer solitude in the park. This,

and the perception of the park as not being crowded,

appeared contradictory. Turkish visitors did not mind the

presence of other visiting groups. Perhaps this is because

they have not travelled and experienced such places as

much as Europeans, where different conditions are found.

Another possible reason could be the dissimilarity of

crowding tolerances, which is influenced by socio-cultural

characteristics. Turkish visitors could be more used to

crowded conditions as a result of living in dense cities, for

example.

Management Implications

The majority of visitors remarked that the trails, which are

part of the ruins, need improvement. This issue has

accessibility, management, safety and ecological aspects.

Accessibility is possibly the most important problem with

the trails because there are many steep and rugged sections.

More than one-third of the visitors are over 50-year-old,

and they need more pleasant and welcoming trails. Trail

design and management also influences the degree or fre-

quency of encountering others, and, consequently, the

perception of crowding, as some trail sections are quite

narrow and do not allow groups to pass each other; one

group often has to wait or slow down, which increases the

perception of crowding. There are safety problems as well,

such as steep and narrow trail sections without railings and

slippery ancient stone blocks. Erosion on the slopes of

trails can create ecological problems such as sedimentation

and local extirpation. Therefore, the trails should be rede-

signed, reconstructed and widened to provide lower gra-

dients and ample spaces for groups to pass one another.

The trail system could be re-organized into loops with one-

way directions, railings should be placed on the more

dangerous sections, board walks should be laid over the

sections where stones have spread out and more resting

points should be provided. Better access, gentle slopes and

properly sited resting points also prevent soil erosion and

eliminate some of the crowding by enabling visitors to be

more dispersed.

Additional trails can be designed to serve visitors who

prefer solitude in the park. Results showed that one-fourth

of all age groups and nationalities preferred for there to be

no other groups in the park, which seems extreme. How-

ever, it is still a point that has to be considered. Therefore,

new trails may help to decrease crowding and encountering

other people in the park.

According to the park authority, recreation design has

always caused managerial conflicts among the responsible

ministries that provide a co-management system for Ter-

messos National Park. The Ministry of Environment and

Forestry is responsible for outdoor recreation and planning,

forest and wildlife, whereas the Ministry of Culture and

Tourism is responsible for the protection of the archaeo-

logical sites. The legislation in Turkey is focused on


123

protection and maintenance of natural and cultural

resources. Thus, proposals for recreational facilities have

usually been rejected or opposed by the Culture and

Tourism authorities to avoid possible damage to archaeo-

logical remains. Nevertheless, both sides have neither

policy nor integrated management systems that prevent

overuse or inappropriate visitor behavior, which may

damage the archaeological and ecological resources of the

park.

The park area is covered with dense Mediterranean

vegetation, including pine and oak forest. Because no

archaeological excavation, restoration work, major vege-

tation trimming or cleaning has been carried out, some

parts of the ruins have disappeared into the naturally

regenerating vegetation. When visitors enter and follow the

trails, they eventually lose their direction by the time they

reach an archaeological site, as elevations and directions

change simultaneously. Despite this, they still like the mix

of ruins and rugged landscape in the park. An in situ model

of the site layout with the trails could help in visualizing

and understanding the park before exploring it.

Suggestions and complaints were also aimed at the

signage problems in the park. The signage system is one of

the basic elements of outdoor recreation design (Bell

2008), providing information and orientation. However, in

Termessos National Park, it is actually the weakest element

of the whole design. There is no signage system in the

park; some signs are missing and existing signs present

many problems, including a lack of languages other than

Turkish and a poor design. Because the majority of visitors

are German, Belgian, French and Dutch, two other lan-

guages besides English and Turkish should be integrated

(German and French). In addition, brochures and maps in

different languages could be provided at the entrance,

which should harmonize with the signage system in the

park and contain the same codes as the signs and maps.

Acknowledgments The funding support provided by the Scientific

and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUB_ITAK) with the

project number TOGTAG-3197 and the Scientific Research Projects

Coordination Unit of Akdeniz University is gratefully acknowledged.

Discussions with Robert Manning and Daniel Krymkowski helped to

focus the intent of this article, and language correction provided by

Simon Bell and Neil Korostoff is especially appreciated.

References

Absher JD, Lee RG (1981) Density as an incomplete course of

crowding in backcountry setting. Leisure Sciences 4:231–247

Akurgal E (2000) Anadolu Uygarlıkları. Net Turistik Yayınlar,_Istanbul, p 642

Alcıtepe E (1998) Termessos Milli Parkı (Antalya) Florası Uzerinde

Bir Arastırma. Antalya, Turkey, Akdeniz Universitesi, M.Sc.

Thesis, 94 pp

Anonymous (1969) Termessos Milli Parkı Uzun Devreli Gelisme

Planı. T.C. Orman Bakanlıgı Orman Genel Mudurlugu Milli

Parklar Dairesi, Ankara, p 55

Anonymous (1998) Batı Akdeniz Bolge Mudurlugu. Elif Matbaacılık,

Antalya, p 35

Anonymous (2003) Termessos Milli Parkı Sorunları Raporu, Antalya,

5 pp

Anonymous (2009) Termessos Milli Parkı Ziyaretci Verileri.

Duzlercamı Doga Koruma Milli Park Muhendisligi Verileri,

Antalya

Arkin H, Colton RR (1968) Tables for statisticians. Barnes & Noble,

New York 168 pp

Arnberger A, Brandenburg C (2007) Past on-site experience, crowd-

ing perceptions, and use displacement of visitor groups to a peri-

urban national park. Environmental Management 40:34–45

Arnberger A, Haider W (2007) A comparison of global and actual

measures of perceived crowding of urban forest visitors. Journal

of Leisure Research 39(4):668–685

Arnberger A, Mann C (2008) Crowding in European forests: a review

of recent research and implications for forest management and

policy. Forestry 81(4):559–571

Atik M, Sayan S, Karaguzel O (2009) Impact of recreational

trampling on the natural vegetation in Termessos National Park,

Antalya-Turkey. Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi. Journal of Agricultural

Sciences 15(3):249–258

Bell S (2008) Design for outdoor recreation. Taylor & Francis,

Abingdon, p 240

Cevre ve Orman Bakanlıgı (2007) Ziyaretci Yonetimi ve Doga TurlarıGenelgesi. Cevre ve Orman Bakanlıgı Doga Koruma ve Milli

Parklar Gn, Mud, p 4

Chang C (1993) A simulation approach to crowding in outdoor

recreation: a study of the Yangmingshan National Park, PhD.

The Pennsylvania State University, The Graduate School,

College of Health and Human Development, 195 pp

Chavez D (1993) Visitor perceptions of crowding and discrimination

at two national forests in Southern California. U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Pacific Southwest Research Station Research

Paper PSW-RP-216, Albany, California, 17 pp

Cıplak B, Aslan B, Yanıkoglu A (1999) Termessos Milli Parkı(Antalya) Orthopteroidea (Insecta) Faunası. 96.01.0105.03 No’lu

Akdeniz Universitesi Arastırma Projesi, 57 pp

Cırık U (2007) Milli Parklar ve Uzun Devreli Gelisme Planları.Planlama 2007(1):45–50

Eagles PFJ, McCool SF (2002) Tourism in parks and protected areas:

planning and management. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK

320 pp

Fleishman L, Feitelson E, Salomon I (2004) The role of cultural and

demographic diversity in crowding perception: evidence from

nature reserves in Israel. Tourism Analysis 9:23–40

Grieser K, Dawson C, Schuster R (2005) Visitor perceptions of

crowding: an exploratory study in the Mohonk preserve. In

Peden J, Schuster R (eds) Proceedings of the 2005 northeastern

recreation research symposium, USDA Forest Service, North-

eastern Research Station, Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-341, pp 212–220

Gunduz S, Akpınar N (2002) Koruma-kullanım _Ilkeleri Cercevesinde

Beynam Muhafaza Ormanı’nın Rekreasyonel Tasıma Kapasites-

inin Saptanması Uzerinde Bir Arastırma. Tarim Bilimleri

Dergisi 8(4):344–351

Hillery M, Nancarrow B, Griffin G, Syme G (2001) Tourist perception

of environmental impact. Annals of Tourism Research 28(4):

853–867

Hughes CS, Vogelsong H (2003) A comparison of residents and non-

residents on perceptions of off-road vehicle use and carrying

capacity. In Murdy J (comp, ed) Proceedings of the 2003

northeastern recreation research symposium, Gen. Tech. Rep.


123

NE-317. USDA Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station,

pp 91–95

Kalisch D, Klaphake A (2007) Visitors’ satisfaction and perception of

crowding in a german national park: a case study on the Island of

Hallig Hooge. Forest Snow and Landscape Research 81(1/

2):109–122

Kim S-O, Shelby B (2008) Norm stability in Jirisan national park:

effect of time, existing conditions, and background characteris-

tics. Environmental Management 41:566–572

Kyle G, Graefe A, Manning R, Bacon J (2004) Effects of place

attachment on users’ perceptions of social and environmental

conditions in a natural setting. Journal of Environmental

Psychology 24(2004):213–225

Lawson SR, Manning RE, Valliere WA, Wang B (2003) Proactive

monitoring and adaptive management of social carrying capacity

in arches national park: an application of computer simulation

modeling. Journal of Environmental Management 68:305–313

Leujak W, Ormond RFG (2007) Visitor perceptions and the shifting

social carrying capacity of south Sinai’s coral reefs. Environ-

mental Planning 39:472–489

Manning RE (1985) Crowding norms in backcountry settings: a

review and synthesis. Journal of Leisure Research 17(2):75–89

Manning RE (1999) Studies in outdoor recreation: search and

research for satisfaction. Oregon State University Press, Corval-

lis, Oregon 374 pp

Ministry of Culture and Tourism (2008) Distribution of foreign tourists

entering turkey according to nationality. http://www.kultur.

gov.tr. Accessed 23 Oct 2008

Ministry of Environment and Forestry (2009) National Parks ınforma-

tion system. http://www.milliparklar.gov.tr/mpd/mp/millipark.asp.

Accessed 15 Oct 2009

Moore SA, Polley A (2007) Defining indicators and standards for

tourism impacts in protected areas: cape range National Park,

Australia. Environmental Management 39:291–300

Muderrioglu H (2002) Acıkhava Rekreasyonunda Tasıma Kapasitesi,

Rekreasyonel Kullanım _Iliskilerinin _Incelenmesi. _Istanbul Univ-

ersitesi, _Istanbul, Ph.D. Dissertation, 129 pp

Noe FP, Hammitt WE, Bixler RD (1997) Park user perceptions of

resource and use impacts under varied situations in three

National Parks. Journal of Environmental Management

49:323–336

Obua J, Harding DM (1996) Visitor characteristics and attitudes

towards Kibale National Park, Uganda. Tourism Management

17(7):495–505

Oku H, Fukamachi K (2006) The differences in scenic perception of

forest visitors through their attributes and recreational activity.

Landscape and Urban Planning 75(2006):34–42

Petrosillo I, Zurlini G, Corliano ME, Zaccarelli N, Dadamo M (2007)

Tourist perception of recreational environment and management

in a marine protected area. Landscape and Urban Planning

79(2007):29–37

Pigram JJ, Jenkins JM (1999) Outdoor recreation management.

Routledge Advances in Tourism, London, UK 329 pp

Priskin J (2003) Tourist perceptions of degradation caused by coastal

nature-based recreation. Environmental Management 32(2):189–204

Resmi Gazete (1983) Milli Parklar Kanunu. Kanun No: 2873, 11

Agustos 1983 Tarih ve 18132 Sayılı Resmi Gazete, Ankara

Roggenbuck JW, Lucas RC (1987) Wilderness use and user

characteristics: a state-of-knowledge review. In: Lucas RC

(comp) Proceedings––national wilderness research conference:

issues, state-of-knowledge directions. USDA Forest Service,

Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-220:204-245

Sert H (2000) Termessos Milli Parkı (Antalya) Avifaunası ve

Ekosistemdeki _Iliskileri. Akdeniz Universitesi, Antalya, M.Sc.

Thesis, 189 pp

Vaske JJ, Donnelly MP, Petruzzi JP (1996) Country of origin,

encounter norms, and crowding in a frontcountry setting. Leisure

Sciences 18:161–176

Verdın GP, Lee ME, Chavez DJ (2008) Planning forest recreation in

natural protected areas of southern Durango, Mexico. Madera y

Bosques 14(1):53–67

Wagar JA (1963) Relationship between visitor characteristics and

recreation activities on two national forest areas. U.S. Forest

Service Research Paper NE-7, Northearstern Forest Experiment

Station Upper Darby, PA, 19 pp

Watson AE, Williams DR, Roggenbuck JW, Daigle JJ (1992) Visitor

characteristics and preferences for three national forest wilder-

nesses in the south. USDA Forest Service Intermountain

Research Station Research Paper INT-455, 27 pp

Watson AE, Cole DN, Turner DL, Reynolds PS (2000) Wilderness

recreation use estimation: a handbook of methods and systems.

USDA Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station, Gen.

Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-56, 198 pp


123

http://www.kultur.gov.tr

http://www.kultur.gov.tr

http://www.milliparklar.gov.tr/mpd/mp/millipark.asp

Problems of Outdoor Recreation: The Effect of Visitors’ Demographics on the Perceptions of Termessos National Park, Turkey

Documents