=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2761/HAICTA_2020_paper61
|storemode=property
|title=Sustainable Tourism Management: Views and Attitudes of Visitors in Regional Unit of Pella (Greece)
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2761/HAICTA_2020_paper61.pdf
|volume=Vol-2761
|authors=Georgios Apostolidis
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/haicta/Apostolidis20b
}}
==Sustainable Tourism Management: Views and Attitudes of Visitors in Regional Unit of Pella (Greece)==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2761/HAICTA_2020_paper61.pdf
Sustainable Tourism Management: Views and
Attitudes of Visitors in Regional Unit of Pella (Greece)
Georgios Apostolidis
Department of Spatial Planning and Development, Faculty of Engineering, Aristotle
University of Thessaloniki, GR-54124, Greece; e-mail: gapostolidis@plandevel.auth.gr
Abstract. Environmental resources (meadows, forests, aquatic, gaming, spa-
wellness) develop land policies and service networks with spatial distribution
in one region, resulting in the multifaceted function and importance of natural
resources for a society and the multidimensional benefits which can be
obtained from them. Mountainous regions fall into the above contexts as they
include areas under specific legal frameworks and special protection regimes
which need to cope with natural and technological needs and hazards. In many
cases, knowledge of the value of intangible goods offered to humans is
unknown and cannot be conceptualized by the existing market only. Therefore,
it is necessary to design a new hypothetical market by simulating services and
resources in an economic valuation grid. It is for these reasons that the present
research has been initiated, exploring the attitudes and views of the visitors of
the Ski Center of Kaimaktsalan based on the frame of guest satisfaction.
Keywords: Tourism Management; Ski Center; Sustainability; Policy making;
WTT.
1 Introduction
Among the methods developed and used for the economic valuation of
environmental goods and services in recent decades, are the Revealed Preference
Methods (RPM) and the Stated Preference Methods (SPM), for which there is, or
there is not a real market. The Total Economic Value (TEV) is the economic value
that results from the Use Value (UV) and Non-Use Value (NUV) (Aanesen et al.
2010). As the tourism infrastructure and facilities offer multiple benefits in terms of
recreational satisfaction rate, the evaluation of the observed and current
developmental criteria for recreational utility is needed to improve many different
services and characteristics of a mountainous region (Christopoulou and Trizoni,
2007; Malasevska and Haugom, 2018; Soutsas et al. 2006). The design of areas that
comprise intensive growth poles of special forms of tourism, such as ski centers,
needs to be based on integrated tourism development interventions which involve
both the protection and enhancement of the natural environment through the
improving and promoting special tourism infrastructure. Therefore, all the values
associated with these areas including the possible modification of them values under
different circumstances (e.g., demand and environmental conditions, infrastructure
416
on offer, among others) should be considered (Apostolidis and Latinopoulos, 2015).
It is for these reasons that the present research has been initiated, providing an
economic valuation of the recreational value of the area.
2 Statistical Methodology
Questionnaires completed by the visitors to the Ski Center of Kaimaktsalan-Voras
Mountain (Greece) were used during the winter period of 2015-2016 to conduct the
present research. The sample size (n=323 guests) is considered as representative, and
the use of results met the necessary statistical conditions. The research tool, a
questionnaire, was developed to be filled on site with the investigator conducting
personal interviews of the respondents-guests. The Haphazard Sampling method was
used and the statistical package IBM SPSS v.20. for the processing of the results and
the analysis of the data (Apostolidis 2017b, 2017a).
3 Field of Research
The research area selected was the Voras Mountain Range due to its
environmental significance. Specifically, the area identified for analysis (valuation
survey) is the Kaimaktsalan Ski Center (highest altitude ski center in Greece-2500m).
4 The Results
To estimate the frequency of their visits, the visitors were invited to respond
whether it was their first time in the ski resort area or not. All sample visitors, i.e.,
100%, responded to the question; of the total sample (n=323), 44.3%, said they had
visited the ski resort before in the past, while 55.7%, stated that it was their first visit.
Over the past year, visitors in the sample who did not come the study area for the
first time, visited the ski resort 152 times. There were no visits reported by 42.7% of
the sample, while a total of 57.3% had visited other ski resorts in Greece and abroad
such as the 3-5 Pigadia, Elatochori, Pisoderi, Vasilitsa, Parnassos, Bansko, etc.
There is a neutral to positive satisfaction among the respondents, which marks an
improvement in infrastructure and overall resource management. It is of interest that
the whole sample n = 323 provided an answer for all the variables and the criteria set.
What is more, the quality of accommodation was evaluated by visitors to indicate
their satisfaction with staying in the area. 48.3% stated to be satisfied, 20.7% stated
to be very satisfied, neither satisfied nor dissatisfied were 22.3% and 1.5% were
dissatisfied, and 1.5% were very dissatisfied; 18 of the respondents in the sample did
not respond (5.6% missing data). The results show a positive impact concerning the
funding which was provided by the European Rural Development Programs
LEADER in the region, which has resulted in the construction of accommodation,
shopping centers and catering facilities in order to create a traditional cultural
417
identity. Respondents at 98.5% believe that the Ski Center contributes to the
development of the wider area, while it is worth noting that only 1.5% of the visitors
shared a different opposite attitude and opinion. According to the data concerning the
availability of the recreational facilities at the Ski Center area, 15.8% of the total
sample were very satisfied, 144 were satisfied (i.e., 44.6% (almost 1/2 of the total
sample)), 31.3% were neutral while 24 guests, namely 7.4% were dissatisfied, and
0.9% were very unhappy. Table 1 shows the financial investigation of travel costs
and daily consumer spending in the region. The cost of fuel from home to the
destination area amounted to a total of 17,728 € while the cost of food and drink
during the stay for the sample amounted to 20,841 €. Additionally, the actual cost of
stay was analyzed into five components: a) transportation; b) food and drink; c)
skiing cost; d) recreational activities; e) other expenses (e.g., purchases,
accommodation).
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of the Travel Cost Parameters.
Maximu Std.
Variables Minimum Sum Mean
m Deviation
Food / Drink cost and other
0 550 20841 64.52 76.124
expenses (travel cost)
Fuel cost needed to get from
5 500 17728 54.89 65.885
home area to the recreation area
Cost of other expenses -
purchases (Costs in the region 0 200 17330 53.65 51.806
€ per Day)
Cost of skiing 0 180 6790 21.02 25.011
Cost of further recreation
0 200 4045 12.52 23.264
activities
Cost of means of transport 0 100 5654 17.50 14.522
Cost of food / drink 0 200 12963 40.13 30.659
In the question of creating a new vision or making a proposition on managing the
wider area, 81.1% of the sample visitors have a new vision for the wider region, with
only 18.9% of the respondents not having one. Next, those of the visitors who have a
vision for new management plans were asked to respond to closed prefabricated type
questions and choose from several proposals that can be implemented in the wider
area with the Willingness to Travel (WTT) WTT technique. The first proposal
concerned the construction of the Cable Car from the Pozar Thermal Springs to the
Kaimaktsalan Ski Center, as both recreational areas are located in the same
mountainous area. The results showed that this scenario would be chosen by 67.2 %
of visitors and would not be chosen by 13.9%. Concerning the second proposal
which involved building an ice skating and a hockey skating rink, there was a
positive choice by 47.1% of respondents, while a negative one by 34.1% of
respondents. Regarding the third proposal, i.e., the development of infrastructure for
campsites in the spring season, it was selected by 119 visitors, i.e., 36.8%, with the
larger percentage of them 44.3%. The sample visitors were also given the
opportunity to express their opinion through a free and open-ended question. Finally,
418
the Alternative Management Proposals for the Greater Area are: Aesthetic interior
design, Upgrading the Lift, Highlighting all the activities that can take place on the
mountains, Renovation of Lifts (speed and infrastructure), Developing the productive
activities of the area with emphasis on the production base of the region,
Construction of a Wind Generator, Exploitation of Vegoritida Lake, Fast aerial
chairlift (with cover/closed), Introducing a Summer Cinema, a Festival with local
dishes and music, a Glassboat, Creating bars, Creating nightclubs, Creation of a
guesthouse next to the Ski Center, Creating more chalets, Modernizing the cafe-bar-
restaurant, Aerial cable car, Developing Renewable Sources of Energy, Construction
of wooden houses, Construction of an Ecological Village, Construction of more cafes
and chalets in the Ski Center, Construction of a sliding plate up to the top,
Construction of a cable car from Agios Athanasios to Panagitsa, Construction of a
cable car from the Ski Center to Agios Athanasios, Enlarge the Chalet, Εlarge the
Chalet with an ultramodern restaurant, Integrated alternative tourism package,
Organized Mountaineering trips, Organized activities of all types, More tracks-
extending the Ski Center, Lower tracks in the Ski Center, Lower tracks in the Ski
Center, Signs for travel destinations in the area, Collaboration of the authorities of all
recreational areas, Artificial snowfall across the track, Submission of proposals for
Government funding, Funding by the Government and the European Union.
Estimating an additional frequency of visits to the Ski Center if the choices of the
relevant visions for the wider region were realized reveals significant results with
reference to the positive economic and social impacts that may arise. 77.1% of the
sample, would visit the Kaimaktsalan Ski Resort more often while only 4% would
not visit it. Response visit count figures for most frequent visits to the Thermal
Springs per year are 1522 visits, while the Willingness to Travel (WTT) of Ski
Center Kaimaktsalan per visitor are six travels. Regarding the management of the Ski
Center, the respondents were asked to indicate whether they had a proposal/vision. A
majority of 69.3% suggested an alternative, with only 30.7% not making a
suggestion. Of the 223 respondents who had a positive choice, using closed-ended
scenarios again, alternative options were available. Statistical results for the first
proposal, which was related to the creation of a modern new lift, showed that 180
respondents would like to have this vision realized 55.7%, while 44, i.e., 13.6% of
the 69.3% of the sample who had a positive choice in the scenarios would not choose
it. The analysis of the results for the second scenario, the construction of a new ski
track, showed a positive choice for 48.6%, while it was identified as a non-desirable
choice by 20.7% of the sample. The construction of protective technical works (e.g.,
from avalanches, etc.) was related to the third proposal for the management of the ski
resort; 129 visitors 39.9% opted for the implementation of the proposal as opposed to
95, 29.4%, who did not choose it. The sample visitors were also given the
opportunity to express their opinion with a free and open-ended question with a focus
on what they want to have implemented in the area of the Ski Center, with the results
presented below (Alternative Management Scenarios for the Ski Center): Creating a
children's sled track, Waiting space for parents near children, E-Ticketing service,
Assignment to a Private Contractor, Renewable Energy Sources (Exploitation of
wind and solar energy - creation of parks etc.), Improvement of Ski Center facilities,
Improving artificial snow and facilities, Improving artificial snow, Creation of
recreational facilities for those who do not wish to ski, Creating a Special Area for
419
Children and Schools, Setting up Camping and Recreational Sports in the Summer,
Create a larger Chalet, Creating of a chalet with accommodation, Developing Spas
and Gym, Developing infrastructure for taverns and food, Different spatial planning
of the ski resort, Alternative land use management, Expanding the Ski Center to
lower altitude, offering rapid lifts and artificial snow, Better recreation facilities and
more traditional ones with a local market, Closed cabin, Closed cabin in Sarantovrysi
and Artificial Snow, Closed Chair, Closed Lift, Higher speed and safety of lifts,
Larger Chalet, Leasing of the Ski Center for more than one calendar year by private
entities, The Chalet should not be a dressing room, Night Skiing, More lift and
tracks, More Shopping Stores, More cannons for artificial snow, Protection from air
in the aerial two-seater lifts (cabin), Chalet in Kremassi, Connection and Cooperation
with the 3-5 Pigadia Ski Resort, Cooperation with other Ski Centers in Greece.
The technique of Willingness to Travel was also used in the management
scenarios for the Ski Center in case realization of the visions and proposals selected
would influence the frequency of visit to the broader region. 67.2% of the sample
respondents, would visit the wider area more often, while only 2.2% would not visit
it. Response visit figures for more visits to the broader region per year are
1493travels, while 6.88 trips per visitor. The comparative results from the WTT
technique have shown that if the scenarios for the management of the wider area are
applied, the demand for visiting per year will be 1522 visits compared to the ones of
the Ski Center, which are 1493. Additionally, visitors were consulted on
environmental issues to explore their views and attitudes towards environmental
sensitization, the Natura 2000 Network etc. The environmental awareness of the
visitors concerning natural resources (meadows, forests, water, game) was
investigated by the degree of their interest. Their responses indicated a high
environmental sensitization for 72.4% of the sample, a low environmental
sensitization for 25.7% of them, and no environmental sensitization for 1.5%
(missing data 0.3%, i.e., n = 1). Regarding knowledge of what the Protected Areas
(e.g., areas belonging to the Nature Network 2000) are, the frequencies and
percentages of the data from the sample show that most respondents know what the
Natura 2000 sites are 68.7% while 31.3% of the respondents are not aware of them.
The percentage distribution of the information sources of the Natura 2000 protected
areas for the citizens who have knowledge of such areas showed that the percentage
of the respondents who obtain information about the protected areas from the media
is 33.7%, friends and relatives 16.4%, governmental organizations - local authorities
13.6%, formal studies 22%, 10.8% from seminars, and 0.3% from another source of
information. The knowledge of the respondents regarding the characterization and
integration of the Voras area into the Natura 2000 Network as a game shelter cannot
be considered as satisfactory since more than half of them 52.9% are not aware of the
protected area, with 152 visitors (47.1%) of the total sample possessing such
knowledge.
To construct a new tourism plan including the special and alternative forms of
tourism developed in the wider area, the areas of tourist attraction developed in the
area where presented to the sample of visitors who were invited to choose which of
the following destinations they will follow or have already followed during their
visit. The plan shows that the visitors will go on a trip or have already planned one
firstly, to Agios Athanasios (89.8%), which suggests that cultural tourism is highly
420
valued in the preferences of the visitors of the Ski Center, who next choose the Pozar
Thermal Spa as a travel destination (70.6%), followed by eco-tourism on Voras
mountain (48.6%), and then, the Agra-Vrython-Nisi wetland with the development of
agritourism (30.34%), immediately afterwards, visitors choose Lake Vegoritida,
namely Naval Sports tourism (30.34%), while the tourist plan of preference is
completed by the selection of the mountain complex of Panagitsa airport (15.48%),
i.e., the activities of the sports air travel club.
As part of building a new tourism plan for a new policy of development and
governance in the broader region, the visitors were asked to answer whether they
would be interested in a Combo Ticket to carry out further recreation activities in the
area. The results showed that 91.6% of the sample of 323 respondents, would choose
this Combo-Ticket, as opposed to 8.4% who would not choose it. The descriptive
results for the visitors who had a positive choice of a combo economic ticket for
recreational activities are presented with a Missing System 8.4%. and the Combo-
Ticket Total Discount Rate Descriptive Statistics shows that the visitors prefer and
like 10% discount of this ticket. It is deduced that the majority of the sample prefer
the Spa treatment, then Skiing, Riding, Boating, Kayaking and Flying follow in order
of preference. Organized visits to the tourist destinations in the wider region were
opted by 84.8% of the visitors, with only a minority of the sample, i.e., 15.2%, not
opting for them. 79.9% of respondents would be willing to pay for such a service,
while only 5% of the respondents would not. The maximum amount (MaxWTP) of
money that they would be willing to pay for such a service is 38.51€, while the total
budget for organized visits is 9936€ according the questioners.
The table 2 shows the correlations and their strength among the activities and
recreation areas which were selected in the wider region. The greatest strength was
presented for boating and kayaking (0.579) which is statistically significant at a basic
level p <0.05.
421
Table 2. Based on x2 Criterion.
Variables x2 Criterion Phi & Cramer's V Criterion
2
Ski - Hydrotherapy x (1)=1.039 p=0.308 Phi = -0.059, Cramer's V=0.059 p=0.308
Ski - Riding x2 (1)=1.715 p=0.190 Phi =-0.76 Cramer's V=0.076 p=0.190
Ski - Boating x2(1)=3.191 p=0.074 Phi=-0.104 Cramer's V=0.104 p=0.074
Ski - Kayak x2 (1)=2.733 p=0.098 Phi & Cramer's V=0.096 p=0.098
Ski - Flight x2 (1)=6.247 p=0.012 Phi & Cramer's V=0.145 p=0.012
2
Hydrotherapy - Riding x (1)=0 p=0.984 Phi & Cramer's V=0.001 p=0.984
Hydrotherapy - Boating x2 (1)=0.518 p=0.472 Phi & Cramer's V=0.042 p=0.472
2
Hydrotherapy - Kayak x (1)=3.959 p=0.047 Phi=-0.116 Cramer's V=0.116 p=0.047
Hydrotherapy - Flight x2 (1)=1.332 p=0.248 Phi=-0.067 Cramer's V=0.067 p=0.248
Riding - Boating x2 (1)=34.900 p=0 Phi & Cramer's V=0.343 p=0
2
Riding - Kayak x (1)=44.215 p=0 Phi & Cramer's V=0.386 p=0
Riding - Flight x2 (1)=42.473 p=0 Phi & Cramer's V=0.379 p=0
Boating - Kayak x2 (1)=99.172 p=0 Phi & Cramer's V= 0.579 p=0
Boating - Flight x2 (1)=57.864 p=0 Phi & Cramer's V=0.442 p=0
Kayak - Flight x2 (1)=85.239 p=0 Phi & Cramer's V=0.537p=0
5 Conclusions
There is a great need for economic evaluation of natural resources in same areas
and recreation centers at the National and European Level. The present research
presents the most important parameters in the tourism product in Regional Unit of
Pella by exploring the attitudes and opinions of the visitors in the area of
Kaimaktsalan.
The previously reported problem and the weakness in the area concerning the
specific subject, with some solutions and suggestions to be provided through the
exploration of the attitudes and opinions of the respondents in mountainous areas and
settlements of Greece. A theoretical basis for giving new dimensions to the factors,
the level of satisfaction of visitors and their intention to visit ski resorts and spa town
around the world was born with successive variables to emerge the new winter
tourism in Greece and their contribution to the research goal with strategic practices
that have to be implemented to increase the satisfaction of visitors as well as the
competitive advantage of the areas.
422
Acknowledgements.
Fundings:
-General Secretariat for Research and Technology (GSRT)
-Hellenic Foundation for Research and Innovation (HFRI)
of the Greek Ministry of Education Research and Religious Affairs.
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki-A.U.TH Research Committee,
National Project/95157/AUTh/GREECE.
Title: The role of economic assessment of environmental resources in
planning sustainable tourism development.
References
1. Aanesen, M., Armstrong, C. and Kahui, V. (2010). IIFET 2010 Montpellier
Proceedings.
2. Apostolidis, G. (2017a). “Applying a Travel Cost Method to Evaluate the
Thermal Tourism in Greece : Case Study of Loutraki Arideas Springs.” In 8th
International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies in
Agriculture, Food and Environment (HAICTA 2017), Chania, Greece, 21-24
September, 2017, 482–88.
3. Apostolidis, G. (2017b). “Investigating the Impact of Visitors ’ Perceptions and
Attitudes towards Sustainable Tourism Management in Greece : The Case of
Pella Prefecture.” In 8th International Conference on Information and
Communication Technologies in Agriculture, Food and Environment (HAICTA
2017), Chania, Greece, 21-24 September, 2017, 580–93. Chania, Greece.
4. Apostolidis, G. and Latinopoulos, D. (2015). “Prospects for Sustainable Tourism
Development in Ski Resorts-Literature Review.” In Proceedings of the 2nd Greek
National Environmental Conference of Thessaly, Skiathos, 26-28, September,
2015, 360–66.
5. Christopoulou, O. and Trizoni, E. (2007). Planning of human activities based on
the views of local authorities in protected areas: The case of Mountain Pelion,
Greece. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 2(1),
44–56. https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP-V2-N1-44-56.
6. Malasevska, I. and Haugom, E. (2018). Optimal prices for alpine ski passes.
Tourism Management, 64, 291–302.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2017.09.006.
7. Soutsas, K., Tsantopoulos, G., Arabatzis, G., and Christopoulou, O. (2006).
Characteristics of tourism development in mountainous regions using categorical
regression: The case of Metsovo (Greece). International Journal of Sustainable
Development and Planning, 1(1), 32–45. https://doi.org/10.2495/SDP-V1-N1-32-
45.
423
Appendix
The guiding questions (key tool of research) of Willingness to Travel-WTT
technique (open and ended) are presented below (part of questioner-sampling).
Question. Have you got a vision or would you like to make proposals concerning the
management of the wider area ?
1. YES 2. NO
If YES, select which options you prefer from the following ones:
(1). The construction of a cable car from Pozar to Kaimaktsalan
(2). The development of an ice skating rink in the region for skating and hockey
(3). Providing infrastructures for camping during the spring season
(4). Other: ..............................................................
Should the abovementioned options be realized, do you think that you would visit the
ski resort more often?
1. YES 2. NO
If YES, how many times per year?
..............................................................................
Have you got a vision or would you like to make proposals concerning the
management of the ski resort ?
1. YES 2. NO
If YES, select which options you prefer from the following ones:
(1). Developing modern new lift
(2). Developing a new ski slope
(3). Developing protective constructions (eg., avalanches, etc.)
(4). Other: .............................................................
Should the aforementioned vision be realized, do you think that the number of visits
to the wider region would rise ?
1. YES 2. NO
If YES, how many times per year ?
..............................................................................
424