Journals / Journal of Agricultural Sciences / 2005 / Volume: 11 Issue: 04

Determination of User Satisfaction in Abant Nature Park by Using ROS Method

ROS Rekreasyonel Fırsat Dağılımı Yöntemi ile Abant Tabiat Parkı’nda Kullanıcı Memnuniyetinin Belirlenmesi

Haldun Müderrisoğlu(Abant İzzet Baysal Üniv. Orman Fak. Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü Konuralp Yerleşkesi - Düzce)
Özgür Yerli(Abant İzzet Baysal Üniv. Orman Fak. Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü Konuralp Yerleşkesi - Düzce)
Aslı Altanlar Turan(Abant İzzet Baysal Üniv. Orman Fak. Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü Konuralp Yerleşkesi - Düzce)
Nurgül Duru(Abant İzzet Baysal Üniv. Orman Fak. Peyzaj Mimarlığı Bölümü Konuralp Yerleşkesi - Düzce)
Pages
—
Publication Date
2005-11-01
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

As a result it was found out that reestablishing the ROS class system according to Turkish standards, stabeling the system on clerarer standards, explaining the ROS language for easier understandingis needed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is determining the participation in recreational activicies in Abant National Park and also the differences of the satisfaction of the visitors who use the areas chosen by ROS classes criterias.
📊
Key Findings & Data:For his reason an inquiry was done to 359 people.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:As a result it was found out that reestablishing the ROS class system according to Turkish standards, stabeling the system on clerarer standards, explaining the ROS language for easier understandingis needed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:ROS · recreation · user satisfaction

Abstract

The aim of this study is determining the participation in recreational activicies in Abant National Park and also the differences of the satisfaction of the visitors who use the areas chosen by ROS classes criterias. Besides adaptation of the ROS system to Abant Nature ark was researched. For his reason an inquiry was done to 359 people. Corelation and variance analyzes were used for interpreting the data taken. As a result it was found out that reestablishing the ROS class system according to Turkish standards, stabeling the system on clerarer standards, explaining the ROS language for easier understandingis needed. The most effective factors on general satisfaction in Abant Nature Park are, season, group size, visitor’s gender, age, income level and the places they come from

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı Abant Tabiat Parkı’ndaki rekreasyonel kullanımlara katılımları ve ROS Rekreasyonel Fırsat Dağılımı sınıflarındaki kriterlere göre saptanan alanları kullanan ziyaretçilerin memnuniyetlerindeki farklılıkları belirlemektir. Bunun yanında bu çalışma ile ROS sisteminin Abant Tabiat Parkı üzerinde kullanılabilirliği araştırılmıştır. Bu amaçla 359 kişiye anket uygulanmıştır. Elde edilen verilerin yorumlanmasında korelasyon ve varyans analizinden yararlanılmıştır. Sonuç olarak Türkiye standartlarına göre ROS sistemi sınıflarının tekrar belirlenmesi, daha net standartlara oturtulması, ROS dilinin açıklanması ve kolay anlaşılırlığının sağlanmasının gerektiği belirlenmiş, Abant Tabiat Parkı’nda genel memnuniyeti en çok etkileyen faktörlerin mevsim, grup büyüklüğü, kullanıcıların cinsiyeti, yaşı, gelir düzeyi ve alana geldikleri yer olduğu tespit edilmiştir

🔖

Cite This Article

Müderrisoğlu, H., Yerli, Ö., Turan, A. A., Duru, N. (2005). Determination of User Satisfaction in Abant Nature Park by Using ROS Method. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, Volume: 11 Issue: 04. https://doi.org/10.1501/Tarimbil_0000000555

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (21)

  1. Absher, J. D., G. Howat, G. Crilley and I Milne. 1996. Toward Quality Customer Service: Market Segments Differences for Sports and Leisure Centres. Australian Leisure, 7(1), 25-28
  2. Atıcı, T., O., Obalı. 2002. Yedigöller ve Abant Gölü (Bolu) Fitoplankton’unun Mevsimsel Değişimi ve Klorifilit-a Değerlerinin Karşılaştırılması. E.Ü. Su Ürünleri Dergisi. Cilt:19. Sayı (3-4):381-389, İzmir.
  3. Brown, P., B. Driver and C. McConnell. 1978. The Opportunity Spectrum Concept in Outdoor Recreation Supply inventories: Background and Application. Proceedings of the Integrated Renewable Resource Inventories Workshop. USDA Forest Service, GTR, RM-55, 73-84
  4. Burns, R. C., A. R. Graefe and J. P. Titre. 1997. Costomer Satisfaction At US Army Corps of Engineers-Administered Lakes: A Compilation of Two Years of Performance Data. Proceedings of the 1997 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium, USDA Forest Service, GTR, NE –241, 12-13.
  5. Burns, R. C., A. R. Graefe, J. D. Absher and J. Titre. 1998. Water-Based Recreationists’ Attitudes Regarding Customer Satisfaction: Differences Between Selected Market Segments. Proceeding of The 1998 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium. Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, GTR/NE-255. pp: 166-171
  6. Clark, R. N. And G. H. Stankey. 1979. The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum: A Farmework for Planning, Management and Research. USDA Forest Service, Pasific Northwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, GTR, PNW-98
  7. Çevreye Genç Bakış, 2004. Abant Gölü Elden Gidiyor. Gazi Üniversitesi, Çorum Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi, Çevre ve Doğal Hayat Topluluğu Yayın Organı, Çorum.
  8. Dawson, C. P., R. Oreskes, F. Kaeprznski and T. More. 2001. Visitor Satisfactions: Backcountry and Wilderness Users ın the White Mountain National Forest. Froceeding of the 2001 Northeastren Recreation Research Symposium. April 1-3, Bolton Landing, New York.
  9. Driver, B. L. And S. R. Tocher. 1970. Toward a behavioral Interpretation of Recreational Engagements, with Implications for Planning. In B.L. Driver (Ed.) Elements of Outdoor Recretion Planning. Ann Arbor, MI: University Microfilm, pp.9-31
  10. Driver, B. and P. Brown.1978. The Oppurtunity Spectrum Concept and Behavioral İnformation in Outdoor Recreation Resource Supply İnventories: a rationale. İn H. Gyde Lund ve ark. (Tech. Coors.), Proceeding of the Workshop: Integrated Inventories and Renewable Natural Resources. Pp.24-31. Gen. Tech. Rpt. RM-55. USAD, Forest Service. Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station. Fort Collins, CO.
  11. Driver, B. L., P. J. Brown, G. H. Stankey and T. G. Gregiore. 1987. The ROS planning system: Evolution, basic concepts, and research needed. Leisure Sciences, 9, 201-212.
  12. http://members.fortunecity.com/cerenonen/doğa.html
  13. http://www.kultur.gov.tr/portal/turkiye_tr.asp?belgeno=45702
  14. Mackay, K. J. and J. L. Crampton. 1990. Measuring The Quality Of Recreation Services, Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 8(3), 47-56.
  15. Mater, B. and H. Sunay. 1985. Abant Gölü Çevresi Turba Oluşumu. İ.Ü. Deniz Bilimleri ve Coğrafya Enstitüsü, Istanbul Üniversitesi; Vol:2, No:2; p:77-92, İstanbul
  16. More, T. A., S. Bulmer, L. Henzer and A. E. Mates. 2003. Extending The Recreation Opportunity Spectrum to Nonfederal Lands in the Northeast: An Implementation Guide, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station: 1-25. USA.
  17. OBM (Orman Bölge Müdürlüğü), 1991. Abant Tabiat Parkı Özel Amenajman Planı, Bolu.
  18. Parasurman, A., V. A. Zeithaml and L. L. Berry. 1988. SERVQUAL: A Multiple-item Scale for Measuring Consumer Perceptions of Service Quality, Journal of retailing, 64, 12-40
  19. Roovers, P., M. Hermy and H. Gulinck. 2002. Visitor Profile, Perceptions and Expectation in Forests From A Gradient of İncreasing Urbanisation in Central Belgium. Landscape and Urban Planing, 59, pp: 129-145
  20. Burns, R. C., A. R. Graefe and J. P. Titre. 1997. Costomer Satisfaction At US Army Corps of Engineers-Administered Lakes: A Compilation of Two Years of Performance Data. Proceedings of the 1997 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium, USDA Forest Service, GTR, NE –241, 12-13.
  21. Burns, R. C., A. R. Graefe, J. D. Absher and J. Titre. 1998. Water-Based Recreationists’ Attitudes Regarding Customer Satisfaction: Differences Between Selected Market Segments. Proceeding of The 1998 Northeastern Recreation Research Symposium. Northeastern Forest Experiment Station, GTR/NE-255. pp: 166-171