Assessing Visitors’ Understanding of River National Park Functions and Landscapes
The assessment of visitor understanding and perceptions of natural landscapes and attitudes towards functions of a river national park is important for the acceptance and success of park management. The study asked 426 visitors to the Donau-Auen (Danube Floodplains) National Park in Eastern Austria...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2023-01-01
|
| Series: | Water |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/15/3/461 |
| _version_ | 1797623115737464832 |
|---|---|
| author | Arne Arnberger Renate Eder Hemma Preisel |
| author_facet | Arne Arnberger Renate Eder Hemma Preisel |
| author_sort | Arne Arnberger |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The assessment of visitor understanding and perceptions of natural landscapes and attitudes towards functions of a river national park is important for the acceptance and success of park management. The study asked 426 visitors to the Donau-Auen (Danube Floodplains) National Park in Eastern Austria about their affinity to the national park brand, their understanding of the river landscapes and attitudes towards the functions of a national park, and to what extent the visitors perceive the Danube Floodplains as a national park at all. The results show that a large proportion of respondents have some understanding of river national parks and their functions. Many respondents have a sense of being in a national park. However, for 60% of the respondents, the national park brand played almost no role in a visit to the national park. Visitors who have a higher affinity for the national park showed a stronger agreement with the functions of a national park. Those images from the Danube Floodplains National Park that depicted natural landscapes were judged by the majority of respondents to be typical of a river national park, but also meadows. Differences regarding the national park landscapes were not found among visitor affinity segments. Implications for environmental communication are presented. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-11T09:19:51Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5e9355d2773f4b96b2ce5267c0bb4150 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2073-4441 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-11T09:19:51Z |
| publishDate | 2023-01-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Water |
| spelling | doaj.art-5e9355d2773f4b96b2ce5267c0bb41502023-11-16T18:22:58ZengMDPI AGWater2073-44412023-01-0115346110.3390/w15030461Assessing Visitors’ Understanding of River National Park Functions and LandscapesArne Arnberger0Renate Eder1Hemma Preisel2Institute of Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, 1190 Vienna, AustriaInstitute of Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, 1190 Vienna, AustriaInstitute of Landscape Development, Recreation and Conservation Planning, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, 1190 Vienna, AustriaThe assessment of visitor understanding and perceptions of natural landscapes and attitudes towards functions of a river national park is important for the acceptance and success of park management. The study asked 426 visitors to the Donau-Auen (Danube Floodplains) National Park in Eastern Austria about their affinity to the national park brand, their understanding of the river landscapes and attitudes towards the functions of a national park, and to what extent the visitors perceive the Danube Floodplains as a national park at all. The results show that a large proportion of respondents have some understanding of river national parks and their functions. Many respondents have a sense of being in a national park. However, for 60% of the respondents, the national park brand played almost no role in a visit to the national park. Visitors who have a higher affinity for the national park showed a stronger agreement with the functions of a national park. Those images from the Danube Floodplains National Park that depicted natural landscapes were judged by the majority of respondents to be typical of a river national park, but also meadows. Differences regarding the national park landscapes were not found among visitor affinity segments. Implications for environmental communication are presented.https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/15/3/461blue spaceenvironmental communicationlandscape changenational park affinityvisitor perception |
| spellingShingle | Arne Arnberger Renate Eder Hemma Preisel Assessing Visitors’ Understanding of River National Park Functions and Landscapes Water blue space environmental communication landscape change national park affinity visitor perception |
| title | Assessing Visitors’ Understanding of River National Park Functions and Landscapes |
| title_full | Assessing Visitors’ Understanding of River National Park Functions and Landscapes |
| title_fullStr | Assessing Visitors’ Understanding of River National Park Functions and Landscapes |
| title_full_unstemmed | Assessing Visitors’ Understanding of River National Park Functions and Landscapes |
| title_short | Assessing Visitors’ Understanding of River National Park Functions and Landscapes |
| title_sort | assessing visitors understanding of river national park functions and landscapes |
| topic | blue space environmental communication landscape change national park affinity visitor perception |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4441/15/3/461 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT arnearnberger assessingvisitorsunderstandingofrivernationalparkfunctionsandlandscapes AT renateeder assessingvisitorsunderstandingofrivernationalparkfunctionsandlandscapes AT hemmapreisel assessingvisitorsunderstandingofrivernationalparkfunctionsandlandscapes |