پديد آورندگان :
خبازي، مصطفي دانشگاه شهيد باهنر كرمان - دانشكده ادبيات - بخش جغرافيا و برنامه ريزي شهري - گروه جغرافيا، ايران , فهيمي فر، اصغر دانشگاه تربيت مدرس - دانشكده هنر و معماري - گروه شهرسازي، تهران , اشتهارديان، احسان اله دانشگاه تربيت مدرس - دانشكده هنر و معماري - گروه شهرسازي، تهران , نوحه سرا، مريم دانشگاه آزاد نجف آباد - دانشكده ادبيات - گروه جغرافيا و برنامه ريزي شهري، اصفهان، ايران , روحاني فرد، زهره دانشگاه خوارزمي، تهران، ايران
چكيده لاتين :
Tourism industry is one the most successful industries of the world in in perspective of gaining income. Gaining of plenteous currency incomes, extension of cultural scientific relations, creating occupations directly and indirectly and representation of country›s security and stability are considered among consequences and achievements of its extension in every country. In today competitive world, various countries, with introducing their touristic graces try to improve their economic status. One of various kinds of tourism which is recently introduced is Geotourism. This word is an intercourse term composed from two words geo with the meaning of earth and tourism. Geotourism is a particular form of tourism industry in which geological tourism is the focus of attention. Experts collectively agree on this matter that Geotourism creates a great potential for many regions which don’t have touristic prosperity. Geotourism industry was formally born in the world in 1955. About 150 to 200 years ago in England, Adam Sedvic for the first time provided geology tours for those who were interested. Lifetime of Woodvardin University museum returns to 1728, this is the first public museum dedicated to applied geology in geology organization which is outfitted with tools of geology interpretation since that date. In midst 1990s Geotourism was increasingly discussed and studied among tourism industry, politicians, advocates of environment protection, geographers, geologists and similar scientific assemblies. Leaders of Geotourism in the world were those who had intercourse studies and activities. For example, Dr. Thomas E. House well known with English name House was the first one in the world who after Adam Sedvic provided an academic definition for Geotourism in 1995 and in this definition has introduced Geotourism something above aesthetical attitude to geological phenomena. Another world leader is professor Russ Kingston Dowling who has many books in various grounds of tourism, ecotourism and finally Geotourism and this is while purely geological attitude to Geotourism in most cases is confined to geo diversity studies and takes the scholar away from contents of geological interpretations and intercourse and multicourse studies of tourism. In 2006, Russ Kingston Dowling and David Newsum in (universal) Geotourism book by extensive drafting of attention to geological tourism, provided a logical answer to Jonathan Tortolut 3 from national geography magazine of America (2012) who simply believes that visiting of all historical –cultural – natural heritages (so that helps stable development and local societies) is Geotourism. In Iran, many students and scholars have worked for introducing Geotourism. One year after Mohammadhasan Nabavi suggestion in 1378 in eighteenth seminar of geology regarding identification of beauties of country›s earth, the work of identifying beauties and geology diversity of the country began. After that in 2006, Alireza Amri Kazemi and Abbas Mehrpouya entered a list of Iran geological diversity to fifth chapter of Geotourism book written by Ross Dowling and David Newsum. Many specialized studies have been performed about surveying of mineral and thermal springs in Iran but lees work is done on touristic aspects of theses springs. Therefore, providing a method for evaluation of touristic value of thermal springs as an important Geotourism in our country is a task which is not surveyed. In this study, a method for evaluation of Geotourism value is offered based on modified Pralong method. For reaching to the score of spring tourism beauty, scientific, cultural, efficiency and economical scales have been investigated in the format of Pralong model. Since Pralong model only notes scales and subscales of tourism score, it has been modified using experts› views. This method addresses evaluation of tourism scaleand place efficiency scale. Its tourism scale can be analyzed and assessed from four aspects: outward beauty, scientific, cultural – historical and social – economical. Tourism scale of a place is obtained from average of these four scale and weight of any of aspects of tourism scale is not more or less than others. Place outward beauty scale addresses its visual and spectacular aspects. Scientific scale is assessed based on criterions like scarcity and didactic position. In evaluation of cultural scale artistic aspects and cultural conventions of the place are emphasized and finally, economic value of each place depends on its exploitable characteristics and Entrepreneurship in the ground of tourism and recreation. In Pralong method, scales and subscales have equal weight in relation to each other, while in multi scale decision making methods usually weight of scales and subscales are different. Especially in the debate of Iran Geotourism equating of these scales won›t entail correct results. Since weight determination was a difficult task, people were asked to categorize scales in precedence order and then regarding to precedence, scales and subscales were weighed. For weighing the following formula was used. In this formula, Wi is i th scale weight and Ri precedence of scale i and n is the number of scales. With several rounds of field study and attendance in the region and obtained raw data, scores of scales were calculated according to tables 4 to 9 with two methods of Pralong and modified Pralong. These numbers show the tourism scale of region as 0.379 in Pralong method and 0.441 in modified Pralong. These numbers are indicative of a favorable status in understudy region in respect of creating touristic recreational facilities for developing a geotouristic system. Of course, %16 growth of modified Pralong score shows more attention to this region regarding to Iranian reporters point of view toward Mr. Pralong view, so that even in its neighborhood another system for creating a geo park is notable (figure 6). But despite the regions potential capabilities, the level and quality of efficiency was evaluated low. Of course regarding to weights of modified Pralong method, this level with %37 growth is in high intermediate category which shows lower efficiency expectancy level of Iranian society than Mr. Pralong method. Then, still some tasks should be done for increasing efficiency quality of this spring and despite implementation of the design of country›s water therapy development and provision of universal design of Joshan hot water by Oghaf organization, effective measurements have not yet been performed for right exploitation of the region. Joshan hot water spring due to closeness to center of province, possessing therapeutic attribute, existence of novel geomorphological and geological perspectives and appropriate weather condition in case of observation of stable tourism principle, decentralization and budget assignment, development of infrastructural, sanitarian, residential and recreational facilities and exertion of service and facility standards can turn to one of the greatest hydrotherapy centers in southeast of the country. One of advantages of the method offered in this study is the calculation of development effect of each of mentioned facilities in increasing the level of tourism score of this Geotourism. Even with evaluation of this method, we can have a comparison between various places in relation with each other for other Geotourism regions of the province.
