A method for complex spatial delimitation of tourism destinations in South Transdanubia 271 Hungarian Geographical Bulletin 59 (3) (2010) pp. 271–287. A method for complex spatial delimitation of tourism destinations in South Transdanubia Antal Aubert1, János Csapó2, Ervin Pirkhoffer3, László Puczkó4 and Géza Szabó5 Abstract As a special segment of the research of the interrelated system of tourism and regional development, the present study is aimed to deal with and focus on the methods of the regional delimitation of spaces and areas of tourism based on its supply and demand aspects, providing recent data on this rather neglected fi eld. Following the general intro- duction of the study area (South Transdanubia, Hungary), the research background with a literature review of the international practice on the given topic is presented. The main portion of the paper is the introduction of a new method elaborated by our research group concerning the demarcation possibilities of core/periphery areas of tourism, among others using GIS methods. This method provides a fairly accurate approach for centre–periphery research concerning the study of tourism. Keywords: destinations vs core areas, demand-supply relations, tourism products, GIS Introduction As a special segment of the research of the relation system between tourism and regional development, the main aim of this study and our research is to present new methods and open up perspectives for the regional delimitation and evaluation of tourism zones or destinations with the help of GIS applica- tions. As spatial processes of tourism are gett ing increasingly complicated in the 21st century it is assumed that for using more detailed and exact methods of the assessment of the tourism sector map representation should play an important role in its planning and monitoring. A basic concept is that with the 1 Institute of Economics, Illyés Gyula Faculty of Education, University of Pécs 2 Department of Tourism, Institute of Geography, Faculty of Sciences, University of Pécs. The study and research of the co-writer was supported by the János Bolyai Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. E-mail: csapoj@gamma.tt k.pte.hu 3 Department of Geoinformatics, Faculty of Sciences, University of Pécs 4 Tourism consultant 5 Department of the Geography of Hungary, Institute of Geography, Faculty of Sciences, University of Pécs 272 exception of areas clearly focal in tourism it is not so obvious to identify tour- ism sites or areas. This is also supported by the fact that in spite of the ever increasing social-economic role of tourism and its potential for development, there have been very few studies purposed to build models for evaluating the economic impact of tourism on certain administrational levels. Some models are known for the evaluation of certain factors such as economic impact on jobs and revenues within tourism, but only few of them have so far been used to analyse spatially the complex factors in a systemic way using GIS methods (Da Cunha, S.K. and Da Cunha, J.C. 2005; ESPON Atlas 2006; Gagnon, S. 2005, 2008; Potts, T.D. and Uysal, M. 1992; Raymond, C. and Brown, G. 2007; Trusins, J. and Bebriss, I. 2005; World Economic Forum: The Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report, 2008; Zhong J. et al. 2007). The present article proposes a complex approach to the spatial and regional assessment of tourism destinations in a more holistic approach based on the analysis of the demand and supply side. The theoretical basis and the initial concept of the research and development of the model is provided by the centre-periphery research and the authors were also infl uenced by the carrying capacity concepts and studies (Butler, R.W. 1996; Coccossis, H. 2001; Da Cunha, S.K. and Da Cunha, J.C. 2005; Lozato-Giotart, J.P. 1992; Mytelka, L.E. and Farinelli, F. 2000; Nordin, S. 2003). Following the general introduction of the study area (South Transdanubia, Hungary) the research background with a literature review of the international practice in the given topic will be presented. The study highlights the fi rst stage of the research, which further on as it is assumed might lead to the creation of a complex delimitation method of regions rep- resenting importance for tourism. General introduction of the study area Although the cultural and natural assets of South Transdanubia are favour- able for the development of tourism, the region’s location is unfortunately peripheric, so the sett lements oft en are isolated and their accessibility is poor. The transport and traffi c corridors of north – south and west – east directions are scarce and there are only few border crossing points. The economy has been determined by the decline of the former industries (heavy industry and mining in Baranya County), foreign investors prefer Budapest or the western Hungarian region and the ratio of SMEs is the smallest in this region of the country. On the other hand R&D activity (at the University of Pécs and Kapos- vár) as well as the agro-ecological potential is outstanding and unemployment is below the national average. 273 The tourism supply of the region relies on the slogan ‘Hungarian Mediterraneum’ refl ecting anthropocentricity, beautiful scenery, tranquil- lity and relaxation. The most important tourism products are health tour- ism (Harkány, Szigetvár, Igal, Tamási, Dombóvár–Gunaras, Kaposvár, Csokonyavisonta, Nagyatád), cultural tourism (Pécs – UNESCO World Heritage Site and European Capital of Culture in 2010), ecotourism (Danube– Drava National Park), wine tourism (Villány–Siklós, Szekszárd, Mecsekalja, Tolna wine region), rural and hunting tourism (Aubert, A. et al. 2007; Aubert, A. and Csapó, J. 2003; Berki, M. and Csapó, J. 2003). The international tourists are coming mainly from Austria, Poland, Croatia, and the Netherlands. The tourism of the region is highly concen- trated spatially since the south shores of Lake Balaton account for some 57% of the total number of tourist arrivals, while the Pécs–Villány-Siklós region att racts another 28%, as the second major destination of South Transdanubia is the Pécs–Mecsek and the Siklós–Villány microregions. (Aubert, A. 2000; Hungarian Tourist Authority, 2005) Research background Literature review Based on the reviewed international literature it could be claimed that there is no accepted practice for the delimitation of core areas or destinations. How- ever, concerning the basic principles of the destination(s) there seems to be a consensus among the international professionals (researchers, practical profes- sionals) which can be summarized in the following (Bieger, Th. 1997; Butler, R.W. 1996; Pechlaner, H. et al. 2002; Pechlaner, H. 2003; Potts, T.D. and Uysal, M. 1992): The delimitation of a certain destination is carried out from the visi- tor’s point of view, disregarding administrative or political borders; A destination has a clear, unique profi le so that it can become a realiz- able and independent brand in the tourism market; The destination should provide a wide range of supply for the tourist; The market initiation of a certain destination should be carried out by a professional management bearing the responsibility for communication, information supply and turnover as well; The local population should be able to identify themselves with the spatial delimitation of the destination and also its market initiation (especially with the brand). During the research it was experienced that the determination of the parameters cannot be independent of the size of the core areas/destinations. – – – – – 274 The international practice frequently uses the concepts of core areas/destina- tions alternately. In favour of defi nite terms the appellation of destination will be used in the following. Examples of international practice Concerning the minimum size and the delimitation criteria of the destination(s) there are signifi cant variations based on the travel drift research among the tourists in diff erent countries. Consequently they take sides on the system of ‘small’, ‘medium sized’ or ‘great’ destinations which margins are disposed by the travel distance on the one hand and concerning the behaviour and habits of the visitors within the target area on the other hand. In the case of Switzerland threshold values were set such as (Pietro, B. et al. 2004; Larbig, C. 2003. et al. 2003; Bieger, Th. and Laesser, C. 1998): 300,000 guest nights in the case of a destination with national or interna- tional reputation (receiving domestic visitors); 600,000 guest nights in the case of a destination with international reputa- tion (with national reach and also taking into consideration the nearby neighbouring target markets); 1 million guest nights in the case of a world famous destination which also att racts other continent’s visitors and market; For further delimitation criteria the disposable marketing budget is uti- lized; When the turnover of one day visits seems to be of great signifi cance, they could take it into consideration with an equivalence value estimate. In the case of Germany there seems to be a concordance in the follow- ing (Becker, Ch. 2004): The nearly 350 regional organisations or tourism associations and the ap- proximately 4,000 local or community tourism bureaus should be colligated in 35–40 competitive destinations – supposing at least 5 million guest nights in every case; These are regions or areas of great international recognition (Oberbayern, Schwarzwald, Harz etc.); For the new federal states the DWIF of Munich elaborated a diff erentiated model to be able to support the determination of their marketability; This model is based on numerous criteria (number of guest nights, size of the budget for the tourism organization, market policy etc.); On this basis only 12 former East-German tourism regions (out of 42 as national total) have such a potential to be able to function as an independent des- tination. In English speaking countries the application of such sharp distinctions is not common (Howie, F. 2003; Ritchie, J.R.B. and Crouch, G.I. 2000). They basically – – – – – – – – – – 275 consider two decisive factors if the destination creation is related to more than one sett lement: Form and quality of the existing transport relations among the members of the destination; Form and content of the existing/future cooperation among the members. In addition to the national approaches in this area – also infl uencing our research aims – another initiative is to be emphasized which was recently introduced by the World Economic Forum concerning the competitiveness of travel and tourism investigations. Realizing the importance of the travel and tourism (T&T) industry for industrialized and developing countries alike, the fundamental objective of the Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report (TTCR) is to explore the factors driving T&T competitiveness worldwide. The aim of the second edition of TTCR covering 130 countries is to provide a comprehensive strategic tool for measuring ‘the factors and policies that make it att ractive to develop the Travel and Tourism sector in diff erent countries.’ (World Economic Forum: The Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report, 2008.) Methods In order to validate the principle of concentration on the core areas during the realization of tourism developments the precise delimitation of the core areas needs to be carried out on the sett lement level. According to the professional defi nitions core areas are tourism centres, which now serve as in the future will also do as att ractions which stimulate the tourism of the region. Though the developments should not exclusively concentrate on the appointed areas in any case these would mean the basics for concentration. At present these areas should not be considered as tourism destinations in the modern sense, but due to their further middle term focused development they could turn into them. Based on the above, in the present research core areas were considered as one of the catalysts of the destinations. Relying on the reviewed interna- tional literature it is claimed that there is no uniform methodology concerning the delimitation of core areas or destinations. The parameters of the delimitation process Based on the Hungarian professional and administrational networks, civilian cooperation, international experience and the available data of the region six parameters were identifi ed as suitable to draw the boundaries of core areas. The main parameters comprising 24 parameter elements are the following: – – 276 1. Present att ractions 2. Decisive tourism products (through qualifi ed service providers and accentuated products) 3. Accommodation capacity and performance data (reservations per 1000 residents and reservations in absolute terms) 4. Tourism networks and development activity (network cooperations and application sources) 5. Local tourism tax 6. Transport conditions (not considered in this model) At the same time it is to be emphasized that via innovative products the present core area system could alter at any time and a new core area can also be generated. Therefore a continuous data collection is necessary from the study region. The core areas created using the above mentioned set of param- eters are formed along the boundaries of the present positions so the non-in- novative developments (e.g. transport) could modify these boundaries. For the parameters identifi ed the following weights have been determined: Present att ractions (20%); Decisive tourism products (25%); Accommodation capacity and performance data (30%); Tourism networks and development activity (20%); Local tourism tax (5%). The research of spatial units delimited by social-economic indicators with GIS methods can open up new perspectives in determining more exact spatial categories and also in creating more expedient subvention networks. Such a problem is the creation of the tourism centre–periphery, centre–centre, agglomeration–periphery systems as well. How can uniform model param- eters be identifi ed and conceptualised that, due to the numeric features can provide a possibility for quantitative and not for qualitative decision making? The answer is hard to fi nd since, based on the parameters, an index or char- acteristic value are to be constructed, that enable to identify regions spatially in an environment with certain values (att raction, landscape elements, service structures etc.) that are diffi cult to express numerically. Naturally, when building models a problem is emerging immediately: is it possible to design a method which is applicable for any area or centre- periphery system based on a relatively small study area? It is assumed that it rather depends on the att raction structure (its diversity) than on the size of the given area. In this study numerous possible solutions are demonstrated, which allow the representation of central zones or peripheries of tourism on the basis of uniform parameters and then the strong sides and weak points of these spatial unit analyses can be highlighted. It is very important however that the given GIS method is a general scheme in which the parameters can be varied hence they provide opportuni- – – – – – 277 ties for generalization and its utilization in diff erent areas as well by changing the investigated parameters but keeping basic model principles. The basic problem of any spatial delimitation is the determination of parameters (Kariotis, G. et al., 2007). The parameters of central areas for tourism can be approached presumably from two diff erent aspects: one of them is the supply and the other is the demand side, which generate supply or demand (or both) centres or core areas. This approach can result in three outputs. In the most favourable case (1) the supply centres appear as demand centres as well and so the analysis will show the complete coincidence of the two spatial categories. The other possibility (2) demonstrates areas where the demand side is high with a relatively low supply side while the most unfa- vourable scenario (3) can be experienced where a remarkable supply centre is coupled with a very restricted demand potential. The demand–supply relation system would result in a clear analyzing environment. But there are no clear processes since in numerous cases the po- litical, economic changes would set back the emergence of market processes. So this model consists of several parameters which cannot be considered as primary input data but they can rather be interpreted as values deduced either from the supply or the demand side (e.g. sources of support). The methods of shaping spatial categories were also demonstrated with the help of GIS and then investigated if these methods could be extended to any other Hungarian regions or counties. By using the above analysis, dur- ing the investigations a high priority was given to drawing exact and unam- biguous boundaries between the core areas, their direct agglomeration and the regions peripheral for tourism. It was evaluated statistically how the support systems and sources won via tenders promoted the possible strengthening of the core areas or induced disadvantaged areas to catch up. This research indicates a very important task for the development of tourism, namely that the support sources could really be used within the spatial units selected to be subsidized. In our method, the basic units for the creation of tourism core areas are limited by administrational sett lement borders. The smallest central area can cover a single sett lement, which emerges from the surrounding areas without any surrounding semi-peripheral regions. Our model and database were built up using ARC/GIS 9.2. For the delimitation of central areas the module of ARC/GIS Spatial Analyst was used. The numeric analysis was carried out by Microsoft Excel. The spatial basis for our GIS model is provided by the database on Hungary’s administrational borders of where sett lements are stored as poly- gons. The related primary, unique key of the database network is the KSH (Central Statistical Offi ce of Hungary) code linking the database to the poly- gon and the database proper. In the region 652 sett lements were analysed and 278 classifi ed by the index as either core or periphery areas. The decisive elements of the supply side were framed based on the sett lement data (called TSTAR) of the CSO. The att raction survey and evaluation criteria of tourism att ractions The demand data was compiled from several databases. First the data were analysed from the 1997 Att raction Survey carried out by the Hungarian Tourism Ltd. In our analysis fi rst we carried out a comparison survey concerning the spatial texture the evaluation of att ractions shows from both viewpoints – local government and private sector – since the two approaches take their decisions by diff ering interests. It is valid fi rst of all for physical (natural) att ractions. The survey covered all the sett lements of Hungary, so here the sett lement itself was the smallest spatial category studied as well. The survey for the total area of the country was implemented by several consultant agencies on a uniform criteria scale (Table 1). For every sett lement, they determined physical/natural, cultural and special att ractions. These att ractions were supplied with a uniform code system – e.g. 100–199 to the physical att ractions, 200–299 to the cultural ones etc. – then two numbers were rendered to the att raction. These value pairs expressed the assessment of the att ractions by the local governments and by the private sector. Values ranged from 1 to 9 for any att raction, in which system 1 meant an att rac- tion of local signifi cance and 9 indicated that of international importance. The data of this att raction survey was renewed by a reambulation in 2007 by the staff members of the Institute of Geography, University of Pécs. Thus in a microregional system the att raction structure was analysed and re- evaluated. This research was initiated and implemented by the commission of the DDRFT (South Transdanubian Regional Development Council) (Aubert, A. et al. 2007). The att raction survey and classifi cation were performed by the rep- resentatives of the private sector and of local governments. In the course of the analysis fi rst a comparison survey was carried out concerning the spatial texture the evaluation of att ractions shows from both i.e. local governmental and private sectoral viewpoints since the two approaches take their decisions based on diff erent criteria. In this correspondence the private sector can be handled as purely market oriented while the classifi cations conducted by local governments seem to refl ect other social expectations too. This alteration raises further intriguing research issues beyond the topic of the present paper. In our opinion a sett lement deemed a core area should reach the na- tional att raction level concerning at least one out of the att ractions, so value 6 was identifi ed as a threshold above which tourism att ractivity was considered 279 Table 1. Evaluation of tourism att ractions by their reach A tt r ac tio n va lu e po in t Att raction category, reach Complementary terms 1 Local att raction 1: Can be developed to a po- tential att raction Local inhabitants know about the att raction and visit it, but without any tourism fl ow. If a tourist arrives there – and obtains knowledge about it – visits the place as a complementary program, but does not travel to the sett lement only because of that particular att raction. 2 Local att raction 2: With a reach and visit of a micro region The neighbouring inhabitants are aware of it and so show it to their guests. It has a certain tourism fl ow as well but does not generate an independent demand. 3 Regional attraction 1: The majority of the visitors come from the given region; induces a signifi cant turnover It is a known, visited and recognized at- traction in the region, but is not familiar outside the region, its external demand is negligible. 4 Regional att raction 2: The majority of the given att raction’s visitors are arriving from the same region but it also att racts visitors from sett le- ments of the neighbouring region (tourists from remote regions or abroad are present but in small numbers) It is well known in its region, the population of the region concern it as a part of its image and visit regularly. It is externally known as well beyond the regional boundaries and so receives external visitors. 5 National att raction 1: The visitors of the at- traction are coming from the entire area of the country but they only form a special guest fl ow segment; the att raction does not generate signifi cant international visits The att raction is completely accepted and accentuated in the region generating demand for one guest segment from the whole coun- try (e.g. a cross country track), but does not motivate other segments. 6 National att raction 2: The visitors of the att rac- tion are coming from the complete area of the country in every segment; the att raction does not generate signifi cant international visits Generates visits in almost all of the visitor segments but is only known and received by the domestic culture (lingual, historical peculiarities) and has no international at- traction. 7 International att raction 1: A signifi cant ratio of the visitors come from abroad but it is basically att ractive from one special segment (the ratio of the domestic guests is lower) Its signifi cant international guest fl ow has a special interest segment (e.g. hunting tourism). 8 International att raction 2: A signifi cant propor- tion of the visitors comes from abroad, repre- senting a wide range of segments (the ratio of the domestic guests is lower) It att racts a signifi cant international guest fl ow basically from the neighbouring coun- tries and from the traditional sending coun- tries. Its demand is massive but does not generate new markets in its present state although it has the potential. 9 Global att raction: Its interpretation exceeds the previous category in that the att raction induces global tourism fl ow and visits to the area inde- pendent from geographical distance In Hungary there are only a few of them such as Budapest or Hungaroring (Formula 1 race track). Source: Own editing 280 signifi cant. When building the applied index for delimiting central areas, as a result of the earlier mentioned survey, areas above value 6 received such a weighing factor solution which raised the signifi cance of the att raction if it was present and highlighted in both surveys (local government and public sector) and gained an international rating. The supply side of the index was analysed from the viewpoint of ser- vice providers. Here the category of the so called ‘qualifi ed service providers’ was analysed. The service providers of the region were summarized then the related factor of the index was created from this database. Also for evaluating the value of the supply side ‘four products’ cat- egory was used. The so called ‘qualifi ed service providers’ in Hungary are: (1) wine route service suppliers, (2) rural tourism accommodation suppli- ers, (3) equestrian tourism hosts, (4) craft smen. From them only the so called Boole values were analysed, which show whether the given product is present or absent at the sett lement. The importance of the specifi c local parameters should be emphasized, since the ‘thermal and spa’ category characteristic for the South Transdanubian Region could be substituted by another product in another region. The demand side can be defi ned more unambiguously than the supply one since it is the most expressed parameter of tourism concerning the number of visitors and their time and money spent. There was analysed the number of guest nights which were applied not in absolute numbers but incorporated in fi ve groups in the model mentioned earlier (present att ractions, decisive tourism products, accommodation capacity and performance data, tourism networks and development activity, local tourism tax). During the survey of commercial and private accommodation capaci- ties and guest fl ows the contradiction was found that in numerous cases no guest fl ow values were linked to the registered capacity. So in this case in reality the given accommodation was not functioning or it had a minimal registered turnover. From a professional point of view the guest night data show the real tourism turnover however the absolute values show a very high standard deviation over the region (Siófok 675,541 person/night/year vs Decs 18 person/night/year). So it was found reasonable to use a specifi c index of the sett lement value of guest nights per 1,000 residents from the KSH database and its categories. It also stands by the application of specifi c index that – knowing the sett lement structure of the region – we could decrease the weight of the sett lements with large population and considerable tourism potential (e.g. Pécs: the value of guest nights per 1,000 residents is 1742) but also we high- light from the lower sett lement category those which could be raised using this index (e.g. Patca: the number of guest nights per 1,000 residents is 59,778). Naturally on the top of this list there are the sett lements with an abundance of tourist fl ow and visitation (e.g. Zamárdi: the number of guest nights per 281 1,000 residents is 101,013). These indices were classifi ed into 7 cat- egories (Table 2). During the survey it was suggested to use not only the specifi c but the absolute values in delimiting of the areas as well. These values (the absolute sett le- ment level values of commercial and private accommodations) were taken into consideration in the same way as the KSH created the above mentioned categories (Table 3). These two values relat- ing to accommodation received equally shared weights within the parameter. The next topic of the present study is the system of spatial supports and grants in which an att empt was made to describe numerically how much a sett lement had been supported from governmental sources and on how many occasions. When constructing the index, it was taken into consideration to what an extent the sett lement is ‘committ ed’ to tourism development, how much it is important (e.g. to establish a tourism information bureau). Finally, it was also recorded if the given sett lement was a member of any regional integration and whether the local tourism tax system was ap- plied. The model provides information for 653 sett lements, based on the de- scribed algorithms and determined the core area values for each sett lement. Estimates show that a total of 197 sett lements were unable to att ain score, while the maximum score for a sett lement was 19. Sett lements with at least 0.4 score were considered eligible for the promotion of development and further cooperation with the core areas. Results The map of core areas representing sett lement level Table 2. The KSH (Central Statistical Offi ce of Hungary) value categories considering the number of guest nights per 1,000 inhabitants Number of guest nights per 1000 inhabitants Category 0–1 2–100 101–200 201–500 501–1,000 1,001–3,000 above 3,000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Source: own edition based on KSH (Central Statistical Offi ce of Hungary) score categories Table 3. The turnover (guest nights) in commercial and private accommodation (person/year) The turnover (guest nights) in commercial and private accommodation (person/year) Category 1–1,000 1,001–10,000 10,001–50,000 50,001–150,000 150,001–250,000 above 250,000 1 2 3 4 5 6 Source: own edition based on KSH (Central Statistical Offi ce of Hungary) score categories 282 When establishing the limit value during the process of demarcation several alternatives were examined. The results of these analyses are visualised in maps with threshold scores serving as limits (Figure 1). It can be well observed from the fi gures that the number of those set- tlements exponentially decreases that cannot be classifi ed into any core areas for reference applying the score 1. Proposed core areas Based on the above considerations the sett lements of the core areas were mapped schematically. The fragmentation of core areas is clearly visible on the map (Figure 2). This fragmentation is less striking if we consider those areas of sporadic distribution at present with a relatively favourable potential as part of the core areas. It is also worth considering that along the river Danube three core areas have been identifi ed. As they bear the same tourism att raction and product potential (natural att ractions and the relating services) presumably they should be connected to produce one contiguous linear core area. Fig. 1. Value scores by sett lements. – 1 = 0; 2 = 0,001–0,4; 3 = 0,4–0,8; 4 = 0,8–1; 5 = score 1> 283 This research could further on raise some new scientifi c issues provid- ing a signifi cant support via our model by promotion of cooperation among sett lements, solution of communicational, positioning tasks or by the deter- mination of the optimum frequency of data collection. The fi nal output of the research was the regional delimitation of areas where tourism is of priority. Eventually 8 tourism destinations were identifi ed within the South Transdanubia NUTS2 region (Figure 3). It should be empha- sized as well that this operation has something not only to add to tourism research but also has signifi cance for regional development since state support for tourism product development and other activities will mainly be available for sett lements referred to one of the core areas/destinations of the region. Conclusions Relying on the analysis of the relationship between regional development and tourism in South Transdanubia the authors claim that it can provide experience for researchers from multiple perspectives. In Hungary, parallel Fig.2. Sett lements and their regional delimitation above the score of 0.4 284 with the emerging regional thinking and the change of objectives in regional development and coherent regional policy, the development and planning of tourism is going to gain a more signifi cant role than ever before. Therefore a more precise analysis of tourism dominated regions is required. Based on this research, the South Transdanubian Regional Development Agency’s Tourism Strategy Development Program assigned the core areas of tourism within the region. Using their potentials they are adequate to become clearly identifi able, characteristic tourism destinations. During the develop- ment of tourism – instead of the thematic, product based development – the emphasis is to be put on the complex development of the certain core areas. The major aim is that these areas i.e. destinations should advance into com- petitive regions of tourism and that the drawing products should be identi- fi ed upon which the unique product supply of each of the core areas could be created along with a complementary product supply as well. To validate the principle of concentration during the realisation of tourism developments it is needed to delimitate the core areas on the set- tlement level thus identify them precisely. Investigations demonstrated that Fig. 3. Tourism destinations in South Transdanubia. Source: Aubert, A. and Szabó, G. (ed.), 2007. – I = Dunamente (zone along the river Danube); II = Drávamente (zone along the river Drava); III = „Kis-Somogyország” (Somogy County); IV = Kapos-völgy (Kapos Valley); V = Zselic Hills; VI = Mecsek Mountains; VII = Pécs; VIII = Harkány-Siklós-Villány 285 model building with GIS methods provide a relatively simple and easy access to determine regions with importance for tourism, critical in terms of tourism planning and regional development both concerning national support and EU assistance or simply the delimitation of tourism spaces. Data at sett lement level can be the starting point for studies which analyze information on guest nights, income and tourism spending, accommodation etc. The proposed model deploys a holistic, quite complex and systemic approach to the assessment of tourism from the spatial and regional perspec- tives. Its results could also contribute to provide strategic guidance for regional development agents or agencies on several administrational levels (national, regional, microregional, local government), and to elaborate strategies for tourism development in central or periphery areas concerning either tourism, economic or social development. So the result obtained from the possible ap- plication of the model could be a more accurate and precise tourism assess- ment and evaluation method with GIS tools generating a more comprehensive understanding of the processes within tourism. It is believed that such inves- tigations can be and shall be used in practice especially at the regional level of tourism planning, describing the regions using exact data with or without importance for tourism. Thus, a more detailed picture can be obtained on the economy and social background of the geographic region studied. Acknowledgement: The study and research by the co-author was supported by the János Bolyai Scholarship of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. REFERENCES Aubert, A. (ed.) 2000. Dél-Dunántúl turizmusfejlesztési koncepciója és stratégiai programja (Tourism development concept and strategic program of South Transdanubia). Pécs, Pécsi Tudományegyetem Földrajzi Intézet Turizmus Tanszék. Aubert, A. (ed.) 2007. A térségi turizmuskutatás és tervezés módszerei, eredményei (Methods and results of spatial tourism research and planning). PTE TTK Földrajzi Intézet, Pécs, 391 p. Aubert, A. and Csapó, J. 2003. A turisztikai programozás területi szintjeinek harmonizációs kérdései a Dél-Dunántúl terület- és vidékfejlesztési terveiben,’ (Harmonisation ques- tions of the spatial levels of tourism programming in the regional and rural develop- ment plans of South Transdanubia). In VI. Falukonferencia. A vidéki Magyarország az EU-csatlakozás előtt . Szerk. Kovács, T. Pécs, MTA RKK 410–420. Aubert, A., Puczkó, L. and Szabó, G. 2007. A Dél-dunántúli régió turisztikai magterületeinek lehatárolása. (Delimitation of tourism core areas of the South Transdanubian Region). Jelentés a DDRFÜ számára. Pécs, Pécsi Tudományegyetem, 38. Becker, Ch. 2004. Destinationmanagement. In: Geographie der Freizeit und des Tourismus. Bilanz und Ausblick. Becker, Ch.-Hopfinger, H.-Steinecke, A. München - Wien, R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 464–474. 286 Berki, M. and Csapó, J. 2003. Turisztikai vezérprojektek a regionális programozás folyamatában a Dél-Dunántúlon. (Major tourism projects in the process of regional planning in South Transdanubia). In Európai kihívások 2. Kis, M., Gulyas, L. and Erdelyi, E. Szeged, Szegedi Tudományegyetem – SZÉF, 437–442. Bieger, Th. 1997. Management von Destinationen und Tourismusorganisationen. Lehr- und Handbücher zu Tourismus, Verkehr und Freizeit. München, P. Oldenbourg Verlag, 395. Bieger, Th. and Laesser, C. (eds.) 1998. Neue Strukturen im Tourismus – Der Weg der Schweiz, Bern–Stutt gart–Wien, P. Haupt, 128. Bundesamt für Bauwesen und Raumordnung. 2006. European Spatial Planning Observation Network: ESPON ATLAS Mapping the structure of the European territory. Bonn, Germany. 92. htt p://www.espon.eu/mmp/online/website/content/publications/98/1235/fi le_2489/ fi nal-atlas_web.pdf (Last access: 2010–01–15) Butler, R.W. 1996. The Concept of Carrying Capacity for Tourism Destinations: Dead or Merely Buried? Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research 2. (3–4): 283–294. Coccossis, H. 2001. Tourism Development and Carrying Capacity. In Tourism, Sustainable Development and Natural Resource Management: experiences of Carribean, Pacific and Mediterranean islands. Eds. Apostolopoulos, G. and Gayle, D. Greenwood, Connecticut. Chapter 8. Da Cunha, S.K. and Da Cunha, J.C. 2005. Tourism Cluster Competitiveness and Sustainability: Proposal for a Systemic Model to Measure the Impact of Tourism on Local Development. Brazilian Administration Review 1. 47–62. htt p://www.anpad.org.br/bar (Last access: 2010–01–15) Gagnon, S. 2005. Le modèle de développement touristique des paysages québécois et l’identité d’une nation dans la logique d’une approche géographique intégrative‘ dans Petites sociétés et minorités nationales: enjeux politiques et perspectives compares. Québec, Presses de l’Université du Québec, 335–350. Gagnon, S. 2008. Towards an Objective Understanding of Spatial Dynamics: Description of a Methodology and Two Case Studies in Quebec. International Conference of Territorial Intelligence, Besancon, France. Available at htt p://www.territorial-intelligence.eu (Last access: 2010–01–15) Howie, F. 2003. Managing the Tourist Destinations. London, Continuum, 337. Hungarian Tourist Authority 2005. Tourism Development Strategy 2005–2013. Available at htt p:// www.mth.gov.hu 133. (Last access: 2010–01–18) Kariotis, G., Panagiotopoulos, E., Kariotou, G., and Karanikolas, N. 2007. Creation of a Digital Interactive Tourist Map with the Contribution of G.P.S. and G.I.S. Technology to Visualization of the Information. Paper presented at the XXIII. International Cartographic Conference, Moscow, 17. htt p://www.teiser.gr/arximidis/pdf/karyotis/XXII_International_Cartografi k_ Conference.pdf (Accessed November 2009) Larbig, C., Elsener, A., Bitterli, S., Keller, F. and Koch, S. 2003. Balanced Scorecard (BSC) – Innovativer Ansatz zur strategischen Erfolgsmessung in einer Destination. In Jahrbuch 2002/2003 der Schweizerischen Tourismuswirtschaft . Hsg. Laesser, Ch. St. Gallen, 115–137. Lozato-Giotart, J.P. 1992. Geographical rating in tourism development. Tourism Management 17. 141–144. Magyar Turizmus Zrt. 1997. Vonzerőleltár 1997. (Att raction Survey 1997), CD-rom. Mytelka, L.E. and Farinelli, F. 2000. Local clusters, innovation systems and sustained competitive- ness. Arranjos produtivos locais e as novas políticas de desenvolvimento industrial e tecnológico. Nota Técnica 5. Estudos Temáticos, IE/UFRJ. Rio de Janeiro, 19. Available at htt p://www.ie.ufrj.br/gei/gil.shml (Last access: 2010–01–15). 287 Nordin, S. 2003. Tourism clustering and innovation: path to economic growth and development. Osternsund, European Tourism Research Institute, MID – Sweden University, Sweden, 19. htt p://www.etour.se/download (Last access: 2010–01–15) Pechlaner, H. 2003. Tourismus-Destinationen in Wett bewerb. Wiesbaden, Deutscher Universitäts- Verlag 100. Pechlaner, H., Weiermair, K., and Laessser, Ch. 2002. Tourismuspolitik und Destinationsmanagement. Bern, P. Haupt, 219. Pietro, B., Bieger, Th. and Boksberger, P.E. 2004. Destinations-Auditing – Ein Integrativer Ansatz zur Evaluation der Eff ektivität und Effi zienz im Destinationsmanagement. Tourismus Journal 8. 51–63. Potts, T.D. and Uysal, M. 1992. Tourism Intensity as a Function of Accommodations. Journal of Travel Research 31. 40–43. Raymond, C. and Brown, G. 2007. A Spatial Method for Assessing Resident and Visitor Att itudes Towards Tourism Growth and Development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15. 520–540. Ritchie, J.R.B. and Crouch, G.I. 2000. The Competitive Destination: A Sustainable Perspective. Tourism Management 21. 1–7. Trusins, J. and Bebriss, I. 2005. Tourism as Creative Force for Spatial Planning in Latvia. Paper presented at 41st ISoCaRP Congress 2005. htt p://www.isocarp.net/Data/case_stud- ies/645.pdf (Last access: 2010–01–15) World Economic Forum 2008. The Travel and Tourism Competitiveness Report 2008. htt p://www. weforum.org/tt cr08browse/index.html (Last access: 2010–01–20) Zhong, J., Zhang, J., Li, D., Zhao, Y., Lu, Song and Shi, C. 2007. Nodes and Field of Tourist Origins to Ancient Village – A Case Study of Huangcheng Village in Shanxi Province of China. Chinese Geographical Science 17. 280–287. 288 Hungary in Maps Edited by Károly Kocsis and Ferenc Schweitzer Geographical Research Institute Hungarian Academy of Sciences Budapest, 2009. 212 p. ‘Hungary in Maps' is the latest volume in a series of atlases published by the Geographical Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. A unique publication, it combines the best features of the books and atlases that have been published in Hungary during the last decades. This work provides a clear, masterly and comprehensive overview of present-day Hungary by a distinguished team of contributors, presenting the results of research in the fi elds of geography, demography, economics, history, geophysics, geology, hydrology, meteorology, pedology and other earth sciences. The 172 lavish, full-colour maps and diagrams, along with 52 tables are complemented by clear, authoritative explanatory notes, revealing a fresh per- spective on the anatomy of modern day Hungary. Although the emphasis is largely placed on contemporary Hungary, important sections are devoted to the historical development of the natural and human environment as well. In its concentration and focus, this atlas was intended to act as Hungary's 'busi- ness card', as the country's résumé, to serve as an information resource for the sophisticated general reader and to inform the international scientifi c community about the foremost chal- lenges facing Hungary today, both in a European context and on a global scale. Examples of such intriguing topics are: stability and change in the ethnic and state territory, natural hazards, earthquakes, urgent fl ood control and water management tasks, land degradation, the state of nature conservation, international environmental confl icts, the general popula- tion decline, ageing, the increase in unemployment, the Roma population at home and the situation of Hungarian minorities abroad, new trends in urban development, controversial economic and social consequences as a result of the transition to a market economy, privatisation, the mas- sive infl ux of foreign direct investment, perspectives on the exploitation of mineral resources, problems in the energy supply and electricity generation, increas- ing spatial concentration focused on Budapest in the fi eld of services (e.g. in banking, retail, transport and telecommunications networks), and fi nally the shap- ing of an internationally competitive tourism industry, thus making Hungary more att ractive to visit. This project serves as a preliminary study for the new, 3rd edition of the National Atlas of Hungary, that is to be co-ordinated by the Geographical Research Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. ------------------------------------------- Price: EUR 20.00 Order: Geographical Research Institute HAS Library H-1388 Budapest, POB. 64. E-mail: magyar@sparc.core.hu << /ASCII85EncodePages false /AllowTransparency false /AutoPositionEPSFiles true /AutoRotatePages /None /Binding /Left /CalGrayProfile (Dot Gain 20%) /CalRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CalCMYKProfile (U.S. Web Coated \050SWOP\051 v2) /sRGBProfile (sRGB IEC61966-2.1) /CannotEmbedFontPolicy /Error /CompatibilityLevel 1.3 /CompressObjects /Tags /CompressPages true /ConvertImagesToIndexed true /PassThroughJPEGImages true /CreateJobTicket false /DefaultRenderingIntent /Default /DetectBlends true /DetectCurves 0.0000 /ColorConversionStrategy /LeaveColorUnchanged /DoThumbnails false /EmbedAllFonts true /EmbedOpenType false /ParseICCProfilesInComments true /EmbedJobOptions true /DSCReportingLevel 0 /EmitDSCWarnings false /EndPage -1 /ImageMemory 1048576 /LockDistillerParams false /MaxSubsetPct 100 /Optimize false /OPM 1 /ParseDSCComments true /ParseDSCCommentsForDocInfo true /PreserveCopyPage true /PreserveDICMYKValues true /PreserveEPSInfo true /PreserveFlatness true /PreserveHalftoneInfo false /PreserveOPIComments true /PreserveOverprintSettings true /StartPage 1 /SubsetFonts true /TransferFunctionInfo /Apply /UCRandBGInfo /Preserve /UsePrologue false /ColorSettingsFile () /AlwaysEmbed [ true ] /NeverEmbed [ true ] /AntiAliasColorImages false /CropColorImages true /ColorImageMinResolution 300 /ColorImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleColorImages true /ColorImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /ColorImageResolution 300 /ColorImageDepth -1 /ColorImageMinDownsampleDepth 1 /ColorImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeColorImages true /ColorImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterColorImages true /ColorImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /ColorACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /ColorImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000ColorACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000ColorImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasGrayImages false /CropGrayImages true /GrayImageMinResolution 300 /GrayImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleGrayImages true /GrayImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /GrayImageResolution 300 /GrayImageDepth -1 /GrayImageMinDownsampleDepth 2 /GrayImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeGrayImages true /GrayImageFilter /DCTEncode /AutoFilterGrayImages true /GrayImageAutoFilterStrategy /JPEG /GrayACSImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /GrayImageDict << /QFactor 0.15 /HSamples [1 1 1 1] /VSamples [1 1 1 1] >> /JPEG2000GrayACSImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /JPEG2000GrayImageDict << /TileWidth 256 /TileHeight 256 /Quality 30 >> /AntiAliasMonoImages false /CropMonoImages true /MonoImageMinResolution 1200 /MonoImageMinResolutionPolicy /OK /DownsampleMonoImages true /MonoImageDownsampleType /Bicubic /MonoImageResolution 1200 /MonoImageDepth -1 /MonoImageDownsampleThreshold 1.50000 /EncodeMonoImages true /MonoImageFilter /CCITTFaxEncode /MonoImageDict << /K -1 >> /AllowPSXObjects false /CheckCompliance [ /None ] /PDFX1aCheck false /PDFX3Check false /PDFXCompliantPDFOnly false /PDFXNoTrimBoxError true /PDFXTrimBoxToMediaBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXSetBleedBoxToMediaBox true /PDFXBleedBoxToTrimBoxOffset [ 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000 ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfile (None) /PDFXOutputConditionIdentifier () /PDFXOutputCondition () /PDFXRegistryName () /PDFXTrapped /False /CreateJDFFile false /Description << /ARA /BGR /CHS /CHT /CZE /DAN /DEU /ESP /ETI /FRA /GRE /HEB /HRV (Za stvaranje Adobe PDF dokumenata najpogodnijih za visokokvalitetni ispis prije tiskanja koristite ove postavke. Stvoreni PDF dokumenti mogu se otvoriti Acrobat i Adobe Reader 5.0 i kasnijim verzijama.) /ITA /JPN /KOR /LTH /LVI /NLD (Gebruik deze instellingen om Adobe PDF-documenten te maken die zijn geoptimaliseerd voor prepress-afdrukken van hoge kwaliteit. De gemaakte PDF-documenten kunnen worden geopend met Acrobat en Adobe Reader 5.0 en hoger.) /NOR /POL /PTB /RUM /RUS /SKY /SLV /SUO /SVE /TUR /UKR /ENU (Use these settings to create Adobe PDF documents best suited for high-quality prepress printing. Created PDF documents can be opened with Acrobat and Adobe Reader 5.0 and later.) /HUN >> /Namespace [ (Adobe) (Common) (1.0) ] /OtherNamespaces [ << /AsReaderSpreads false /CropImagesToFrames true /ErrorControl /WarnAndContinue /FlattenerIgnoreSpreadOverrides false /IncludeGuidesGrids false /IncludeNonPrinting false /IncludeSlug false /Namespace [ (Adobe) (InDesign) (4.0) ] /OmitPlacedBitmaps false /OmitPlacedEPS false /OmitPlacedPDF false /SimulateOverprint /Legacy >> << /AddBleedMarks false /AddColorBars false /AddCropMarks false /AddPageInfo false /AddRegMarks false /ConvertColors /ConvertToCMYK /DestinationProfileName () /DestinationProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /Downsample16BitImages true /FlattenerPreset << /PresetSelector /MediumResolution >> /FormElements false /GenerateStructure false /IncludeBookmarks false /IncludeHyperlinks false /IncludeInteractive false /IncludeLayers false /IncludeProfiles false /MultimediaHandling /UseObjectSettings /Namespace [ (Adobe) (CreativeSuite) (2.0) ] /PDFXOutputIntentProfileSelector /DocumentCMYK /PreserveEditing true /UntaggedCMYKHandling /LeaveUntagged /UntaggedRGBHandling /UseDocumentProfile /UseDocumentBleed false >> ] >> setdistillerparams << /HWResolution [2400 2400] /PageSize [612.000 792.000] >> setpagedevice