Journal of Resources and Ecology ›› 2022, Vol. 13 ›› Issue (6): 1087-1097.DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2022.06.013
• Tourism Resource and Ecotourism • Previous Articles Next Articles
PU Lili1(
), LU Chengpeng2,*(), CHEN Xingpeng1,2
Received:2021-10-16
Accepted:2022-03-20
Online:2022-11-30
Published:2022-10-12
Contact:
LU Chengpeng
About author:PU Lili, E-mail: pull18@lzu.edu.cn
Supported by:PU Lili, LU Chengpeng, CHEN Xingpeng. Evaluation of Rural Tourism Resources based on the Tourists Perspective: A Case Study of Lanzhou City, China[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2022, 13(6): 1087-1097.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: http://www.jorae.cn/EN/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2022.06.013
Fig. 1 The number of tourists received and income of rural tourism in all counties (districts) of Lanzhou in 2019
| Target layer (A) | Criterion layers (B) | Index layer (C) |
|---|---|---|
| Rural tourism resource evaluation (A) | Resource value (B1) | Cultural (C1) |
| Local (C2) | ||
| Inheritance (C3) | ||
| Ornamental (C4) | ||
| Pleasure (C5) | ||
| Strange (C6) | ||
| Experiential (C7) | ||
| Scale (C8) | ||
| Popular science (C9) | ||
| Educational (C10) | ||
| Environmental factors (B2) | Rural (C11) | |
| pastoral (C12) | ||
| Natural (C13) | ||
| Simplicity (C14) | ||
| Comfort (C15) | ||
| Characteristic (C16) | ||
| Combination (C17) | ||
| Reception conditions (B3) | External transportation (C18) | |
| Internal transportation (C19) | ||
| Tour line design (C20) | ||
| Accommodation conditions (C21) | ||
| Tourism goods (C22) | ||
| Tour guide (C23) | ||
| Personnel quality (C24) | ||
| Environmental safety (C25) |
Table 1 The evaluation structure of rural tourism resources
| Target layer (A) | Criterion layers (B) | Index layer (C) |
|---|---|---|
| Rural tourism resource evaluation (A) | Resource value (B1) | Cultural (C1) |
| Local (C2) | ||
| Inheritance (C3) | ||
| Ornamental (C4) | ||
| Pleasure (C5) | ||
| Strange (C6) | ||
| Experiential (C7) | ||
| Scale (C8) | ||
| Popular science (C9) | ||
| Educational (C10) | ||
| Environmental factors (B2) | Rural (C11) | |
| pastoral (C12) | ||
| Natural (C13) | ||
| Simplicity (C14) | ||
| Comfort (C15) | ||
| Characteristic (C16) | ||
| Combination (C17) | ||
| Reception conditions (B3) | External transportation (C18) | |
| Internal transportation (C19) | ||
| Tour line design (C20) | ||
| Accommodation conditions (C21) | ||
| Tourism goods (C22) | ||
| Tour guide (C23) | ||
| Personnel quality (C24) | ||
| Environmental safety (C25) |
| A | B1 | B2 | B3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | 1 | 3 | 2 |
| B2 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/3 |
| B3 | 1/2 | 3 | 1 |
Table 2 A-B judgment matrix
| A | B1 | B2 | B3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 | 1 | 3 | 2 |
| B2 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/3 |
| B3 | 1/2 | 3 | 1 |
| B1 | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 | C7 | C8 | C9 | C10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 1 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/4 | 1/5 | 2 | 1/7 | 1/4 | 1/3 | 1/3 |
| C2 | 3 | 1 | 1/2 | 1/5 | 1/5 | 1/2 | 1/4 | 1/2 | 1/3 | 1/5 |
| C3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1/4 | 1/3 | 4 | 1/3 | 3 | 1/2 | 1/2 |
| C4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1/3 | 3 | 1/2 | 6 | 1/3 | 3 |
| C5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 3 |
| C6 | 1/2 | 2 | 1/4 | 1/3 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/4 | 1/2 | 1/7 | 1/5 |
| C7 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1/2 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 1/3 | 2 |
| C8 | 4 | 2 | 1/3 | 1/6 | 1/5 | 2 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/3 | 1/4 |
| C9 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1/2 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 |
| C10 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 1/3 | 1/3 | 5 | 1/2 | 4 | 1/2 | 1 |
Table 3 B1-C judgment matrix
| B1 | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 | C7 | C8 | C9 | C10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C1 | 1 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/4 | 1/5 | 2 | 1/7 | 1/4 | 1/3 | 1/3 |
| C2 | 3 | 1 | 1/2 | 1/5 | 1/5 | 1/2 | 1/4 | 1/2 | 1/3 | 1/5 |
| C3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1/4 | 1/3 | 4 | 1/3 | 3 | 1/2 | 1/2 |
| C4 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1/3 | 3 | 1/2 | 6 | 1/3 | 3 |
| C5 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 3 |
| C6 | 1/2 | 2 | 1/4 | 1/3 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/4 | 1/2 | 1/7 | 1/5 |
| C7 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1/2 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 1/3 | 2 |
| C8 | 4 | 2 | 1/3 | 1/6 | 1/5 | 2 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/3 | 1/4 |
| C9 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 1/2 | 7 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 2 |
| C10 | 3 | 5 | 2 | 1/3 | 1/3 | 5 | 1/2 | 4 | 1/2 | 1 |
| B2 | C11 | C12 | C13 | C14 | C15 | C16 | C17 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C11 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 1/3 |
| C12 | 1/3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 1/5 |
| C13 | 1/2 | 1/2 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 4 | 1/6 |
| C14 | 1/6 | 1/3 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 1/5 |
| C15 | 1/5 | 1/3 | 1/7 | 1/4 | 1 | 3 | 1/6 |
| C16 | 1/7 | 1/4 | 1/4 | 1/3 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/6 |
| C17 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 1 |
Table 4 B2-C judgment matrix
| B2 | C11 | C12 | C13 | C14 | C15 | C16 | C17 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C11 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 7 | 1/3 |
| C12 | 1/3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 1/5 |
| C13 | 1/2 | 1/2 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 4 | 1/6 |
| C14 | 1/6 | 1/3 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 1/5 |
| C15 | 1/5 | 1/3 | 1/7 | 1/4 | 1 | 3 | 1/6 |
| C16 | 1/7 | 1/4 | 1/4 | 1/3 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/6 |
| C17 | 3 | 5 | 6 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 1 |
| B3 | C18 | C19 | C20 | C21 | C22 | C23 | C24 | C25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C18 | 1 | 3 | 1/3 | 1/2 | 3 | 2 | 1/3 | 1/2 |
| C19 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/5 | 1/3 | 2 | 4 | 1/7 | 1/3 |
| C20 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 |
| C21 | 2 | 3 | 1/2 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 1/2 | 3 |
| C22 | 1/3 | 1/2 | 1/5 | 1/5 | 1 | 3 | 1/3 | 1/5 |
| C23 | 1/2 | 1/4 | 1/5 | 1/3 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/7 | 1/9 |
| C24 | 3 | 7 | 1/3 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 3 |
| C25 | 2 | 3 | 1/5 | 1/3 | 5 | 9 | 1/3 | 1 |
Table 5 B3-C judgment matrix
| B3 | C18 | C19 | C20 | C21 | C22 | C23 | C24 | C25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C18 | 1 | 3 | 1/3 | 1/2 | 3 | 2 | 1/3 | 1/2 |
| C19 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/5 | 1/3 | 2 | 4 | 1/7 | 1/3 |
| C20 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 3 | 5 |
| C21 | 2 | 3 | 1/2 | 1 | 5 | 3 | 1/2 | 3 |
| C22 | 1/3 | 1/2 | 1/5 | 1/5 | 1 | 3 | 1/3 | 1/5 |
| C23 | 1/2 | 1/4 | 1/5 | 1/3 | 1/3 | 1 | 1/7 | 1/9 |
| C24 | 3 | 7 | 1/3 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 3 |
| C25 | 2 | 3 | 1/5 | 1/3 | 5 | 9 | 1/3 | 1 |
| Matrix | Maximum eigenvalue | Weight | N | CI | RI | CR | Consistency check |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A-B | 3.0536 | W= (0.5278, 0.1396, 0.3325) | 3 | 0.0964 | 1.87 | 0.052 | <0.1, Adopt |
| B1-C | 11.3167 | W= (0.0336, 0.0351, 0.0651, 0.1414, 0.2182, 0.0319, 0.1449, 0.0476, 0.1814, 0.1007) | 10 | 0.1463 | 1.49 | 0.098 | <0.1, Adopt |
| B2-C | 7.7934 | W= (0.2297, 0.1217, 0.105, 0.0751, 0.0402, 0.0286, 0.3998) | 7 | 0.1322 | 1.36 | 0.097 | <0.1, Adopt |
| B3-C | 8.9201 | W= (0.0816, 0.0514, 0.3049, 0.1557, 0.0412, 0.0283, 0.2152, 0.1216) | 8 | 0.1314 | 1.41 | 0.093 | <0.1, Adopt |
Table 6 Test for consistency check of the index in the evaluation of rural tourism resources
| Matrix | Maximum eigenvalue | Weight | N | CI | RI | CR | Consistency check |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A-B | 3.0536 | W= (0.5278, 0.1396, 0.3325) | 3 | 0.0964 | 1.87 | 0.052 | <0.1, Adopt |
| B1-C | 11.3167 | W= (0.0336, 0.0351, 0.0651, 0.1414, 0.2182, 0.0319, 0.1449, 0.0476, 0.1814, 0.1007) | 10 | 0.1463 | 1.49 | 0.098 | <0.1, Adopt |
| B2-C | 7.7934 | W= (0.2297, 0.1217, 0.105, 0.0751, 0.0402, 0.0286, 0.3998) | 7 | 0.1322 | 1.36 | 0.097 | <0.1, Adopt |
| B3-C | 8.9201 | W= (0.0816, 0.0514, 0.3049, 0.1557, 0.0412, 0.0283, 0.2152, 0.1216) | 8 | 0.1314 | 1.41 | 0.093 | <0.1, Adopt |
| A | B | Indicator weight | Evaluation factor C | Indicator weight | Total weight of indicators | Index total weight sort |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation for rural tourism resources | B1 | 0.5278 | C1 | 0.0336 | 0.0177 | 16 |
| C2 | 0.0351 | 0.0185 | 15 | |||
| C3 | 0.0651 | 0.0344 | 11 | |||
| C4 | 0.1414 | 0.0747 | 5 | |||
| C5 | 0.2182 | 0.1152 | 1 | |||
| C6 | 0.0319 | 0.0168 | 19 | |||
| C7 | 0.1449 | 0.0765 | 4 | |||
| C8 | 0.0476 | 0.0251 | 14 | |||
| C9 | 0.1814 | 0.0958 | 3 | |||
| C10 | 0.1007 | 0.0532 | 8 | |||
| B2 | 0.1396 | C11 | 0.2297 | 0.0321 | 12 | |
| C12 | 0.1217 | 0.017 | 18 | |||
| C13 | 0.105 | 0.0147 | 20 | |||
| C14 | 0.0751 | 0.0105 | 22 | |||
| C15 | 0.0402 | 0.0056 | 24 | |||
| C16 | 0.0286 | 0.004 | 25 | |||
| C17 | 0.3998 | 0.0558 | 7 | |||
| B3 | 0.3325 | C18 | 0.0816 | 0.0271 | 13 | |
| C19 | 0.0514 | 0.0171 | 17 | |||
| C20 | 0.3049 | 0.1014 | 2 | |||
| C21 | 0.1557 | 0.0518 | 9 | |||
| C22 | 0.0412 | 0.0137 | 21 | |||
| C23 | 0.0283 | 0.0094 | 23 | |||
| C24 | 0.2152 | 0.0716 | 6 | |||
| C25 | 0.1216 | 0.0404 | 10 |
Table 7 Weight of rural tourism resource evaluation indicators
| A | B | Indicator weight | Evaluation factor C | Indicator weight | Total weight of indicators | Index total weight sort |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation for rural tourism resources | B1 | 0.5278 | C1 | 0.0336 | 0.0177 | 16 |
| C2 | 0.0351 | 0.0185 | 15 | |||
| C3 | 0.0651 | 0.0344 | 11 | |||
| C4 | 0.1414 | 0.0747 | 5 | |||
| C5 | 0.2182 | 0.1152 | 1 | |||
| C6 | 0.0319 | 0.0168 | 19 | |||
| C7 | 0.1449 | 0.0765 | 4 | |||
| C8 | 0.0476 | 0.0251 | 14 | |||
| C9 | 0.1814 | 0.0958 | 3 | |||
| C10 | 0.1007 | 0.0532 | 8 | |||
| B2 | 0.1396 | C11 | 0.2297 | 0.0321 | 12 | |
| C12 | 0.1217 | 0.017 | 18 | |||
| C13 | 0.105 | 0.0147 | 20 | |||
| C14 | 0.0751 | 0.0105 | 22 | |||
| C15 | 0.0402 | 0.0056 | 24 | |||
| C16 | 0.0286 | 0.004 | 25 | |||
| C17 | 0.3998 | 0.0558 | 7 | |||
| B3 | 0.3325 | C18 | 0.0816 | 0.0271 | 13 | |
| C19 | 0.0514 | 0.0171 | 17 | |||
| C20 | 0.3049 | 0.1014 | 2 | |||
| C21 | 0.1557 | 0.0518 | 9 | |||
| C22 | 0.0412 | 0.0137 | 21 | |||
| C23 | 0.0283 | 0.0094 | 23 | |||
| C24 | 0.2152 | 0.0716 | 6 | |||
| C25 | 0.1216 | 0.0404 | 10 |
| Category | Variable | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 62.54 |
| Female | 37.46 | |
| Age | <18 yr | 4.53 |
| 18-25 yr | 21.61 | |
| 26-30 yr | 16.72 | |
| 31-40 yr | 42.16 | |
| 41-50 yr | 8.71 | |
| 51-60 yr | 4.53 | |
| >60 yr | 1.74 | |
| Educational background | High school or below | 26.30 |
| College undergraduate and junior college | 67.94 | |
| Postgraduate | 5.75 | |
| Monthly income | ≤3500 yuan | 31.01 |
| 3501-4500 yuan | 18.12 | |
| 4501-5000 yuan | 34.49 | |
| 5501-10000 yuan | 11.33 | |
| >10000 yuan | 5.05 | |
| Profession | Customer service staff | 23.34 |
| Student | 18.64 | |
| Other | 19.16 | |
| Salesman | 7.49 | |
| Teacher | 5.92 | |
| Operating personnel | 4.18 | |
| Administrator | 4.18 | |
| Office salaries | 3.31 | |
| Civilian staff and other personnel | 13.78 | |
| Travel modes | Unit organization/Business meetings | 5.75 |
| Travel agency | 21.60 | |
| Friends and relatives together | 51.22 | |
| Alone | 19.86 | |
| Other | 1.57 |
Table 8 Characteristics of the rural tourism tourists surveyed in Lanzhou City
| Category | Variable | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 62.54 |
| Female | 37.46 | |
| Age | <18 yr | 4.53 |
| 18-25 yr | 21.61 | |
| 26-30 yr | 16.72 | |
| 31-40 yr | 42.16 | |
| 41-50 yr | 8.71 | |
| 51-60 yr | 4.53 | |
| >60 yr | 1.74 | |
| Educational background | High school or below | 26.30 |
| College undergraduate and junior college | 67.94 | |
| Postgraduate | 5.75 | |
| Monthly income | ≤3500 yuan | 31.01 |
| 3501-4500 yuan | 18.12 | |
| 4501-5000 yuan | 34.49 | |
| 5501-10000 yuan | 11.33 | |
| >10000 yuan | 5.05 | |
| Profession | Customer service staff | 23.34 |
| Student | 18.64 | |
| Other | 19.16 | |
| Salesman | 7.49 | |
| Teacher | 5.92 | |
| Operating personnel | 4.18 | |
| Administrator | 4.18 | |
| Office salaries | 3.31 | |
| Civilian staff and other personnel | 13.78 | |
| Travel modes | Unit organization/Business meetings | 5.75 |
| Travel agency | 21.60 | |
| Friends and relatives together | 51.22 | |
| Alone | 19.86 | |
| Other | 1.57 |
| Criterion layers (B) | Evaluation factors (C) | The score of the evaluation matrix | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ||
| Resource value (B1) | C1 | 0.014 | 0.012 | 0.016 | 0.049 | 0.087 | 0.098 | 0.111 | 0.237 | 0.280 | 0.096 |
| C2 | 0.014 | 0.017 | 0.017 | 0.045 | 0.080 | 0.098 | 0.164 | 0.183 | 0.291 | 0.091 | |
| C3 | 0.007 | 0.017 | 0.026 | 0.051 | 0.073 | 0.105 | 0.150 | 0.190 | 0.294 | 0.087 | |
| C4 | 0.005 | 0.007 | 0.012 | 0.031 | 0.070 | 0.096 | 0.155 | 0.432 | 0.094 | 0.098 | |
| C5 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 0.010 | 0.026 | 0.070 | 0.127 | 0.157 | 0.207 | 0.314 | 0.080 | |
| C6 | 0.014 | 0.003 | 0.035 | 0.056 | 0.075 | 0.117 | 0.138 | 0.185 | 0.296 | 0.082 | |
| C7 | 0.007 | 0.010 | 0.010 | 0.059 | 0.091 | 0.101 | 0.146 | 0.195 | 0.308 | 0.071 | |
| C8 | 0.010 | 0.009 | 0.026 | 0.047 | 0.087 | 0.118 | 0.120 | 0.430 | 0.077 | 0.075 | |
| C9 | 0.012 | 0.021 | 0.045 | 0.056 | 0.073 | 0.122 | 0.345 | 0.185 | 0.073 | 0.068 | |
| C10 | 0.014 | 0.021 | 0.031 | 0.056 | 0.063 | 0.098 | 0.146 | 0.192 | 0.298 | 0.082 | |
| Environmental factors (B2) | C11 | 0.012 | 0.009 | 0.012 | 0.061 | 0.061 | 0.117 | 0.129 | 0.206 | 0.300 | 0.094 |
| C12 | 0.002 | 0.009 | 0.024 | 0.054 | 0.075 | 0.099 | 0.162 | 0.179 | 0.307 | 0.089 | |
| C13 | 0.002 | 0.009 | 0.019 | 0.049 | 0.070 | 0.103 | 0.122 | 0.209 | 0.091 | 0.328 | |
| C14 | 0.005 | 0.009 | 0.016 | 0.037 | 0.073 | 0.113 | 0.136 | 0.218 | 0.296 | 0.098 | |
| C15 | 0.003 | 0.010 | 0.010 | 0.030 | 0.077 | 0.110 | 0.159 | 0.430 | 0.082 | 0.089 | |
| C16 | 0.009 | 0.007 | 0.024 | 0.051 | 0.064 | 0.106 | 0.167 | 0.413 | 0.071 | 0.087 | |
| C17 | 0.005 | 0.012 | 0.026 | 0.044 | 0.087 | 0.110 | 0.145 | 0.193 | 0.305 | 0.073 | |
| Reception conditions (B3) | C18 | 0.005 | 0.009 | 0.014 | 0.028 | 0.042 | 0.106 | 0.139 | 0.253 | 0.317 | 0.087 |
| C19 | 0.002 | 0.005 | 0.024 | 0.023 | 0.066 | 0.108 | 0.153 | 0.247 | 0.291 | 0.080 | |
| C20 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.017 | 0.026 | 0.071 | 0.111 | 0.153 | 0.244 | 0.296 | 0.071 | |
| C21 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 0.009 | 0.031 | 0.064 | 0.115 | 0.174 | 0.233 | 0.300 | 0.064 | |
| C22 | 0.003 | 0.009 | 0.024 | 0.070 | 0.066 | 0.122 | 0.155 | 0.197 | 0.073 | 0.280 | |
| C23 | 0.023 | 0.030 | 0.033 | 0.071 | 0.071 | 0.087 | 0.127 | 0.193 | 0.291 | 0.073 | |
| C24 | 0.003 | 0.009 | 0.026 | 0.049 | 0.057 | 0.103 | 0.141 | 0.233 | 0.298 | 0.080 | |
| C25 | 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.002 | 0.035 | 0.063 | 0.099 | 0.143 | 0.256 | 0.298 | 0.099 | |
Table 9 Fuzzy evaluation matrix for the recognition of rural tourism resources
| Criterion layers (B) | Evaluation factors (C) | The score of the evaluation matrix | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ||
| Resource value (B1) | C1 | 0.014 | 0.012 | 0.016 | 0.049 | 0.087 | 0.098 | 0.111 | 0.237 | 0.280 | 0.096 |
| C2 | 0.014 | 0.017 | 0.017 | 0.045 | 0.080 | 0.098 | 0.164 | 0.183 | 0.291 | 0.091 | |
| C3 | 0.007 | 0.017 | 0.026 | 0.051 | 0.073 | 0.105 | 0.150 | 0.190 | 0.294 | 0.087 | |
| C4 | 0.005 | 0.007 | 0.012 | 0.031 | 0.070 | 0.096 | 0.155 | 0.432 | 0.094 | 0.098 | |
| C5 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 0.010 | 0.026 | 0.070 | 0.127 | 0.157 | 0.207 | 0.314 | 0.080 | |
| C6 | 0.014 | 0.003 | 0.035 | 0.056 | 0.075 | 0.117 | 0.138 | 0.185 | 0.296 | 0.082 | |
| C7 | 0.007 | 0.010 | 0.010 | 0.059 | 0.091 | 0.101 | 0.146 | 0.195 | 0.308 | 0.071 | |
| C8 | 0.010 | 0.009 | 0.026 | 0.047 | 0.087 | 0.118 | 0.120 | 0.430 | 0.077 | 0.075 | |
| C9 | 0.012 | 0.021 | 0.045 | 0.056 | 0.073 | 0.122 | 0.345 | 0.185 | 0.073 | 0.068 | |
| C10 | 0.014 | 0.021 | 0.031 | 0.056 | 0.063 | 0.098 | 0.146 | 0.192 | 0.298 | 0.082 | |
| Environmental factors (B2) | C11 | 0.012 | 0.009 | 0.012 | 0.061 | 0.061 | 0.117 | 0.129 | 0.206 | 0.300 | 0.094 |
| C12 | 0.002 | 0.009 | 0.024 | 0.054 | 0.075 | 0.099 | 0.162 | 0.179 | 0.307 | 0.089 | |
| C13 | 0.002 | 0.009 | 0.019 | 0.049 | 0.070 | 0.103 | 0.122 | 0.209 | 0.091 | 0.328 | |
| C14 | 0.005 | 0.009 | 0.016 | 0.037 | 0.073 | 0.113 | 0.136 | 0.218 | 0.296 | 0.098 | |
| C15 | 0.003 | 0.010 | 0.010 | 0.030 | 0.077 | 0.110 | 0.159 | 0.430 | 0.082 | 0.089 | |
| C16 | 0.009 | 0.007 | 0.024 | 0.051 | 0.064 | 0.106 | 0.167 | 0.413 | 0.071 | 0.087 | |
| C17 | 0.005 | 0.012 | 0.026 | 0.044 | 0.087 | 0.110 | 0.145 | 0.193 | 0.305 | 0.073 | |
| Reception conditions (B3) | C18 | 0.005 | 0.009 | 0.014 | 0.028 | 0.042 | 0.106 | 0.139 | 0.253 | 0.317 | 0.087 |
| C19 | 0.002 | 0.005 | 0.024 | 0.023 | 0.066 | 0.108 | 0.153 | 0.247 | 0.291 | 0.080 | |
| C20 | 0.003 | 0.005 | 0.017 | 0.026 | 0.071 | 0.111 | 0.153 | 0.244 | 0.296 | 0.071 | |
| C21 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 0.009 | 0.031 | 0.064 | 0.115 | 0.174 | 0.233 | 0.300 | 0.064 | |
| C22 | 0.003 | 0.009 | 0.024 | 0.070 | 0.066 | 0.122 | 0.155 | 0.197 | 0.073 | 0.280 | |
| C23 | 0.023 | 0.030 | 0.033 | 0.071 | 0.071 | 0.087 | 0.127 | 0.193 | 0.291 | 0.073 | |
| C24 | 0.003 | 0.009 | 0.026 | 0.049 | 0.057 | 0.103 | 0.141 | 0.233 | 0.298 | 0.080 | |
| C25 | 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.002 | 0.035 | 0.063 | 0.099 | 0.143 | 0.256 | 0.298 | 0.099 | |
| Criterion layers (B) | The score of the evaluation matrix | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| B1 | 0.0081 | 0.0125 | 0.0218 | 0.045 | 0.075 | 0.1108 | 0.184 | 0.2405 | 0.2216 | 0.0805 |
| B2 | 0.006 | 0.0102 | 0.0204 | 0.0488 | 0.0757 | 0.1097 | 0.1415 | 0.2137 | 0.2653 | 0.1095 |
| B3 | 0.0034 | 0.0071 | 0.0167 | 0.0359 | 0.0631 | 0.1076 | 0.1507 | 0.2389 | 0.2894 | 0.0857 |
Table 10 Evaluation of rural tourism resources in Criterion layers B
| Criterion layers (B) | The score of the evaluation matrix | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| B1 | 0.0081 | 0.0125 | 0.0218 | 0.045 | 0.075 | 0.1108 | 0.184 | 0.2405 | 0.2216 | 0.0805 |
| B2 | 0.006 | 0.0102 | 0.0204 | 0.0488 | 0.0757 | 0.1097 | 0.1415 | 0.2137 | 0.2653 | 0.1095 |
| B3 | 0.0034 | 0.0071 | 0.0167 | 0.0359 | 0.0631 | 0.1076 | 0.1507 | 0.2389 | 0.2894 | 0.0857 |
| Target layer (A) | The score of the evaluation matrix | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| Resource evaluation of rural tourism | 0.0062 | 0.0104 | 0.0199 | 0.0425 | 0.0711 | 0.1096 | 0.1670 | 0.2362 | 0.2502 | 0.0863 |
Table 11 Evaluation of rural tourism resources in rural tourism resource evaluation
| Target layer (A) | The score of the evaluation matrix | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | |
| Resource evaluation of rural tourism | 0.0062 | 0.0104 | 0.0199 | 0.0425 | 0.0711 | 0.1096 | 0.1670 | 0.2362 | 0.2502 | 0.0863 |
Fig. 2 Weight sequence for the evaluation of rural tourism resources
Fig. 3 Degree of cognition in the rural tourism resource grades
| Index | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 | C7 | C8 | C9 | C10 | C11 | C12 | C13 | C14 | C15 | C16 | C17 | C18 | C19 | C20 | C21 | C22 | C23 | C24 | C25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D-value | 2 | -4 | -6 | -8 | -3 | -1 | -11 | -8 | -22 | -13 | 1 | 6 | 19 | 14 | 5 | 3 | -9 | 10 | 12 | -5 | 3 | 12 | -1 | -4 | 8 |
Table 12 Differences in the sequence between attention and degree of cognition
| Index | C1 | C2 | C3 | C4 | C5 | C6 | C7 | C8 | C9 | C10 | C11 | C12 | C13 | C14 | C15 | C16 | C17 | C18 | C19 | C20 | C21 | C22 | C23 | C24 | C25 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D-value | 2 | -4 | -6 | -8 | -3 | -1 | -11 | -8 | -22 | -13 | 1 | 6 | 19 | 14 | 5 | 3 | -9 | 10 | 12 | -5 | 3 | 12 | -1 | -4 | 8 |
| [1] | Chen Q, Fu J. 2010. Research on evaluation of ancient village tourism resources based on visitor perception. Economic Geography, 30(2): 329-333. (in Chinese) |
| [2] |
Chen X, Jiang X Q, Lu Y. 2020. Study on the rural ecotourism resource evaluation system. Environmental Technology & Innovation, 20: 101131. DOI: 10.1016/j.eti.2020.101131.
DOI |
| [3] | Chen X Y. 2019a. Research on rural tourism development strategy based on tourists' participation. Journal of Anhui Business College (Social Sciences Edition), 18(2): 26-29. (in Chinese) |
| [4] | Chen Y. 2019b. Classification and evaluation of rural tourism resources in western Hunan minority areas. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 40(2): 205-210. (in Chinese) |
| [5] | Du J, Xiang P. 1999. Reflections on the sustainable development of rural tourism. Tourism Tribune, (1): 15-18, 73. (in Chinese) |
| [6] | Feng J. 2019. Investigation and potential analysis of rural tourism resources in Xinyang City. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 40(12): 307-312. (in Chinese) |
| [7] |
Geng H, Li Y Q, Fan Z Y. 2019. Regional spatial disparity and influencing factors of the development of angertainment: A comparative study of Zhejiang, Hubei and Sichuan Provinces. Economic Geography, 39(11): 183-193. (in Chinese)
DOI URL |
| [8] |
Guo H C, Han F. 2010. Review on the development of rural tourism in China. Progress in Geography, 29(12): 1597-1605. (in Chinese)
DOI |
| [9] | He X F, Zhang X Q, Zhang X M. 2020. Evaluation of rural tourism resources in Inner Mongolia based on AHP-FCE. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 34(10): 187-193. (in Chinese) |
| [10] | Huang X. 2019. Analysis on tourism space and image cognition of Lanzhou City based on Network Travel Notes. Diss., Lanzhou, China: Lanzhou University. (in Chinese) |
| [11] | Huang X, Wang L Y. 2020. Research on rural red tourism development from the perspective of cultural tourism integration. The Border Economy and Culture, (4): 54-56. (in Chinese) |
| [12] | Huang Y Q. 2017. Linhe Ancient City Floating Folk Song Festival tourism development strategy. Journal of Southern Forum, (2): 71-73. (in Chinese) |
| [13] | Huo Y P. 1982. Analysis and evaluation of regional tourism resources by functional scoring method-Taking Zhenjiang City of Jiangsu Province as an example. Territory & Natural Resources Study, 1982(2): 19-26. (in Chinese) |
| [14] | Jin Y. 2009. The evaluation of rural tourism resources based on the AHP method. Proceedings for the 4th Euro-Asia Conference on Environment and Corporate Social Responsibility: Tourism, Mice and Management Technique Session, PTI, Berlin, Germany: 52-58 |
| [15] | Li D K. 2018. Research on new business forms of rural tourism-Take Luanchuan County, Luoyang City as an example. Journal of Luoyang Institute of Science and Technology (Social Science Edition), 33(1): 41-48. (in Chinese) |
| [16] | Lin D R, Chen Y Y. 2019. The dilemma and breakthrough of smart tourism rural construction: From smart trend to sustainable development. Tourism Tribune, 34(8): 3-5. (in Chinese) |
| [17] | Liu K, Wang K, Li C. 2019. Study on the spatial distribution stage evolution and development path of rural tourism destinations in Guizhou Province. Journal of Guizhou University (Natural Sciences), 36(5): 119-124. (in Chinese) |
| [18] | Liu L L, Chang Q. 2018. Evaluation study on the sustainable development of rural tourism in Shangluo. Henan Science, (8): 1319-1328. (in Chinese) |
| [19] | Liu W, Sun L. 2010. Exquisite behavior characteristics of Chengdu urban residents' rural tourist destinations. Journal of Southwest Minzu University (Humanities and Social Science), 31(3): 180-183. (in Chinese) |
| [20] |
Liu Z, Lu C, Mao J, et al. 2021. Spatial-temporal heterogeneity and the related influencing factors of tourism efficiency in China. Sustainability, 13(11): 5825. (in Chinese)
DOI URL |
| [21] | Lu C P, Lu C Y, Pang M, et al. 2019b. Spatial structure and evolution of tourism economy of cities in Liaoning Province. Journal of Liaoning University (Natural Sciences Edition), 46(1): 10-19. (in Chinese) |
| [22] | Lu F, Yan W J, Zhang H. 2021. Measurement and spatial type of Rural Tourism Kinetic Energy System in Shandong Province. Journal of Shandong Institute of Commerce and Technology, 21(1): 20-25. (in Chinese) |
| [23] | Lu L, Ren Yi S, Zhu D C, et al. 2019a. The research framework and prospect of rural revitalization led by rural tourism. Geographical Research, 38(1): 102-118. (in Chinese) |
| [24] | Luo B. 2021b. A study on the development model of rural tourism in China. China Market, 2021(16): 33-36 3. (in Chinese) |
| [25] | Luo G Y. 2021a. The development characteristics of foreign rural tourism. Rural Revitalization, (2): 92-93. (in Chinese) |
| [26] | Luo J F. 2017. Rural tourism object safety risk evaluation and empirical research. Scientific and Technological Management of Land and Resources, 34(3): 96-103. (in Chinese) |
| [27] | Lv W Q. 2016. Wuhan Caidian District rural tourism resources evaluation and development countermeasures. Diss., Wuhan, China: Central China Normal University. (in Chinese) |
| [28] |
Morris H, Romeril M. 1986. Farm tourism in England Peak National Park, The Environmentalist, 6(2): 105-110.
DOI URL |
| [29] | Ni Z F. 2020. Research on the development status and countermeasures of rural tourism-Take Nanling as an example. Journal of Liaoning Institute of Science and Technology, 22(4): 32-34. (in Chinese) |
| [30] | Pang W H. 2017. A SWOT analysis and development countermeasure on rural tourism planning in Longnan. Journal of Lanzhou University of Arts and Science (Social Science), 33(6): 64-68. (in Chinese) |
| [31] | Qin L. 2014. Study on ecological civilization evaluation of rural tourism destination. Diss., Bengbu, China: Anhui University of Finance and Economics. (in Chinese) |
| [32] | Su Q. 2007. A study on rural tourism and rural tourism development in China. Journal of Anhui Normal University (Natural Science), 30(3): 395-400. (in Chinese) |
| [33] | Sun J X, Bao J G. 2006. Tourism development and rural urbanization of Daizuyuan Community. Journal of Central South University for Nationalities (Humanities and Social Sciences), 26(2): 40-44. (in Chinese) |
| [34] | Tang J B. 2015. Research on the marketing strategy of rural tourism under the New Normal. Academic Journal of Jingchu, 16(4): 49-54. (in Chinese) |
| [35] | Wang B, Luo Z H, Hao S P. 2006. A study on the current situation of the development of rural tourism in Beijing. Tourism Tribune, 21(10): 63-69. (in Chinese) |
| [36] | Wang L, Yang X X, Xiang X, et al. 2019c. Research on risk assessment of rural tourism development: A case study of Chengkou County Heyu Township in Chongqing. Ecological Economy, 35(4): 140-145. (in Chinese) |
| [37] | Wang M, Wang Y Y, Zhu H. 2019b. Research on elite absorption and space production: The case of homestay inn village. Tourism Tribune, 34(12): 75-85. (in Chinese) |
| [38] | Wang N. 2019. Rural tourism and rural cultural renaissance: A consumer-sponsored perspective. Tourism Tribune, 34(6): 6-7. (in Chinese) |
| [39] | Wang Q S, He Z X. 2021a. Evaluation and countermeasures for sustainable development of rural tourism resources in Tianjin based on AHP. Journal of Tianjin University of Commerce, 41(4): 45-51. (in Chinese) |
| [40] | Wang Q, Geng X L. 2020. Evaluation of rural tourism resources by combining entropy weight method with COPRAS-A case study of Tongcheng City, Anhui Province. Resource Development & Market, 36(1): 89-94. (in Chinese) |
| [41] | Wang R, Dai M L, Ou Y H, et al. 2021b. Measurement of rural households' livelihood assets with cultural capital intervention: A case study of Likeng Village in Wuyuan. Tourism Tribune, 36(7): 56-66. (in Chinese) |
| [42] | Wei C, Ge D Z, Long H L, et al. 2018. The tourism-led rural transformation development mode in the metropolitan fringe region: The case of Wuhan City. Economic Geography, 38(10): 216. (in Chinese) |
| [43] | Wu B H. 2016. Rural tourism is an effective way to activate ancient villages. Farmers' Daily, 2016-06-25. (in Chinese) |
| [44] | Wu J, Ma Y F, Gao J. 2012. Evaluation of ancient capital tourism resources based on visitor perception. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 26(2): 186-191. (in Chinese) |
| [45] | Wu J J, Wang S, Lu Y, et al. 2021a. Exploring the pathway of rural tourism to help rural revitalization under the internet environment. Modern Rural Science and Technology, (6): 16-18. (in Chinese) |
| [46] |
Wu J L, Liu S, Liu S L, et al. 2020. Vulnerability assessment and influencing factors of farmers towards rural tourism in Zhangjiajie. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 40(8): 1336-1344. (in Chinese)
DOI |
| [47] | Wu Y C. 2021b. On development strategy of rural tourism in terms of tourists' perception. Journal of Wuhan Business University, 35(4): 21-25. (in Chinese) |
| [48] | Xiao J. 2021. Rural tourism management from the perspective of regional cooperation. Western Travel, (5): 28-29. (in Chinese) |
| [49] | Xiao Y X, Ming Q Z, Li S Z. 2001. On the concept and types of rural tourism. Tourism Science, (3): 8-10. (in Chinese) |
| [50] | Xie C S, Ji Y Y. 2019. Cultural connotation and image presentation of “Rurality” in rural tourism. Journal of Shaoguan University (Social Science), 40(7): 62-67. (in Chinese) |
| [51] |
Xing Y H, Li S, Liao J J, et al. 2019. Suitability evaluation of rural tourism based on AHP and fuzzy evaluation method. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 267(3): 032007. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/267/3/032007.
DOI |
| [52] | Xu Q Q. 2020. Research on the current development of rural tourism products in South Jiangsu. China Journal of Commerce, (17): 145-146, 149. (in Chinese) |
| [53] | Yan F W, Yang X Z, Shu B Y. 2019. A study on the evolution process and mechanism of human settlement environment in rural tourist destinations: Taking Huihang Road as an example. Tourism Tribune, 34(10): 93-105. (in Chinese) |
| [54] | Yan Y, Tan Z. 2021. Investigation and analysis of leisure agriculture and rural tourism operators in Guangxi. China Collective Economy, (2): 5-7. (in Chinese) |
| [55] | Yang Z G. 2019. Development path of rural leisure tourism resources under sharing economy model. Agricultural Economics, (8): 61-63. (in Chinese) |
| [56] | Ye C L, Qin Y. 2019. A brief analysis on the development of leisure agriculture and rural tourism. Rural Economy and Science and Technology, 30(9): 80-83. (in Chinese) |
| [57] | Yin Z N, Yin J, Xu S Y. 2007. A study on the quantitative evaluation of rural tourism resources in Shanghai. Tourism Tribune, 22(8): 59-63. (in Chinese) |
| [58] | Yuan C, Kong X, Chen P Y, et al. 2021. Informal rural tour guides: Willing or reluctant participants? Tourism Tribune, 36(1): 87-98. (in Chinese) |
| [59] | Yuan Y. 2020. Research on rural tourism development model and planning and design strategy of Northern Shaanxi·Haojiaqiao. Diss., Xi'an, China: Xi'an University of Construction, Science and Technology. (in Chinese) |
| [60] | Zeng S S. 2015. Research on transformation and upgrading of Fenghua's rural tourism based on optimization of spatial distribution. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 43(15): 185-188. (in Chinese) |
| [61] | Zeng T X, Ma C Q. 2006. On the development of rural tourism resources. Journal of Shaoyang University, (5): 32-34. (in Chinese) |
| [62] | Zhang D Y. 2019. Study on classification and evaluation of rural tourism resources in Luoyang City. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 40(8): 74-79. (in Chinese) |
| [63] | Zhang J, Dong L Y, Hua G M. 2017. A review of rural tourism resources evaluation. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 38(10): 19-24. (in Chinese) |
| [64] | Zhao M. 2017. Characteristics and influencing factors analysis of rural tourism network in Lanzhou. Diss., Lanzhou, China: Northwest Normal University. (in Chinese) |
| [65] | Zhe M W. 2009. Study on rural-tourism planning model in Chongqing under the urban and rural overall development. Diss., Chongqing, China: Chongqing University. (in Chinese) |
| [66] | Zhou Y B, Xie Y P, Li Z R. 2005. Discussion on standardization of rural tourism. Journal of Guilin Institute of Tourism, 16(4): 5-10, 16. (in Chinese) |
| [1] | YAO Yunxiao, WANG Wen, YANG Wenting, ZHANG Qihao. Assessing the Health of Inland Wetland Ecosystems over Space and Time in China [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2021, 12(5): 650-657. |
| [2] | LI Haiping, GAO Ge, LI Jing. Ecological Security Assessment of the Yancheng National Nature Reserve based on GIS [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2020, 11(1): 38-49. |
| [3] | GU Changjun, ZHANG Yili, LIU Linshan, LI Lanhui, ZHANG Binghua. Comprehensive Evaluation of the Suitability of Agricultural Land in Myanmar [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2018, 9(6): 609-621. |
| [4] | LI Pingheng, YAN Lidong, PAN Shilei, MA Yifei. Evaluation of Agricultural Ecological Security in Hubei Province [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2017, 8(6): 620-627. |
| [5] | LI Jie, XU Xingliang, LIANG Tao. Kin Interactions of Arabidopsis Based on the Integrated Performance of Plants [J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2017, 8(2): 185-190. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||
