EN中文

Journal of Resources and Ecology >

2024 , Vol. 15 >Issue 2: 484 - 495

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2024.02.023

Ecotourism

Evaluation and Enhancement Model of the Development Potential of Green Tourism in Beijing’s Ecological Conservation Area

  • ZHENG Qianqian , 1 ,
  • TANG Chengcai , 2, 3, * ,
  • ZHANG Ying 1
Expand
  • 1. School of Management, Minzu University of China, Beijing 100081, China
  • 2. School of Tourism Sciences, Beijing International Studies University, Beijing 100024, China
  • 3. Research Center for Beijing Tourism Development, Beijing 100024, China
*TANG Chengcai, E-mail:

ZHENG Qianqian, E-mail:

Received date: 2023-06-27

  Accepted date: 2023-11-30

  Online published: 2024-03-04

Supported by

The National Natural Science Foundation of China(42071199)

The Project to Improve the Basic Research Ability of Young and Middle-aged Teachers in Guangxi Universities(2021KY0808)

The National Social Science Fund of China(19BGJ017)

The Beijing Social Science Foundation of China(22GLB036)

Fold

Abstract

The large-scale and rapid development of tourism has led to many challenges in the sustainable development of Ecological Conservation Areas (ECAs). In this study, we constructed the model of the development potential of green tourism (DPGT) in ECAs. We then used this model to measure and analyze the spatial-temporal evolution of DPGT in Beijing’s Ecological Conservation Area (BECA), and built the enhancement model of DPGT in BECA. Our results demonstrate that the DPGT in BECA continued to rise from 2011 to 2020, showing the spatial characteristics of high in the north and low in the south. Each district has a different development focus, so differentiated management measures need to be implemented in the different areas. Finally, we built the enhancement model of DPGT in BECA, with “zoning management, focused implementation” as the guideline, protective development of resources as the basic force, ecological optimization of the whole process as the sustainable force, high-quality building of industries as the core force, and the insistence on multi-subject participation as the guarantee force. This study developed a new method to measure DPGT in ECAs, and provided a systematic management framework for green tourism and regional green development in ECAs.

Key words： green development; green tourism; Ecological Conservation Areas; development potential; Beijing

Cite this article

ZHENG Qianqian , TANG Chengcai , ZHANG Ying . Evaluation and Enhancement Model of the Development Potential of Green Tourism in Beijing’s Ecological Conservation Area[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2024 , 15(2) : 484 -495 . DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2024.02.023

1 Introduction

Ecological Conservation Areas (ECAs) are important places for practicing harmony between humanity and nature. ECAs are defined as restricted development areas due to their important ecological functions and fragile environments (Zhang, 2009), and they are important ecological barriers for protecting the regional ecological environment and guaranteeing resources (Ma et al., 2017). However, the conflicting objectives between ecological conservation and economic development have become a prominent contradiction in the development of ECAs (Tang et al., 2022), so coordinating the conservation and development of ECAs has become an important issue. Many scholars have assessed and analyzed the value of ecological services and ecological compensation mechanisms in ECAs (Li et al., 2019). They have pointed out that tourism development is an important way to coordinate the conservation and development in ECAs, and it is significant for achieving sustainable development in ECAs under various industrial constraints (He et al., 2010). In the process of the large-scale and rapid development of tourism, ECAs are gradually facing problems such as resource shortages, environmental pollution (Votsi et al., 2014), ecological degradation (He et al., 2010), and ecological security crises (Wang et al., 2012; Tang et al., 2018). Therefore, many scholars have discussed the sustainable development of tourism in ECAs in terms of the temporal and spatial evolution of the green development of tourism, influencing factors, and development models, which are based on the theory that lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets, the theory of green development, and the concept of ecological civilization construction (Tang et al., 2019; Tang et al., 2022).
Green tourism is a narrowly defined approach to the green development of tourism, which takes green, scientific, low-carbon and sustainable development as its development principles, uses green technological innovation to develop tourism resources scientifically and appropriately, focuses on tourism connotation and quality, and shifts the traditional approach to tourism development into a modern approach to tourism development with coordinated economic, social and environmental development (Wei, 2011). However, green tourism is easily confused with the green development of tourism, as well as with eco-tourism, so it is necessary to clarify their differences here. The green development of tourism is a way of developing the tourism industry with ecological values and ecological ethics as the main development concepts, including economic greening, coordinated social development, environmental greening and the guarantee of governmental regulation (Tang et al., 2022). Therefore, while green tourism focuses on the development and utilization of tourism resources by green technology, the green development of tourism focuses more on the concept of green development throughout the whole process of tourism. So green tourism is a narrowly defined approach to the green development of tourism. Green tourism and eco-tourism have similarities and differences. First, both green tourism and eco-tourism are ways of achieving sustainable tourism development, and they have the same goal, which is to achieve the coordinated development of economy, society and the environment. Second, they have different connotations and focuses. Eco-tourism takes the ecosystem of the harmonious coexistence of man and nature as the object, and manages its protective use, so that the tourists, local residents, and tourism operators all benefit. It is also a form of tourism that can educate the public about the environment (Zhang, 2014), and at the same time it has the dual functions of ecological protection and economic development, so it is an important way to develop an environmentally friendly economy and a low carbon economy (Qiu, 2021). Therefore, green tourism focuses more on green development concepts and green technologies, while eco- tourism focuses more on the ecosystems and natural resources. This is an important theoretical and practical guide for the sustainable development of tourism in ECAs and for solving the complex problems caused by the participation of multiple actors (Tang et al., 2022).
Evaluating the development potential of green tourism (DPGT) is the premise and foundation of green tourism development (Kim and Kwon, 2009; He et al., 2022). Scholars have constructed the indicator system for evaluating DPGT from many dimensions, such as the green tourism market, green tourism resources, green tourism support force and green tourism binding force (He et al., 2022); the potential of tourism landscape resources, potential of visitor market, potential of ecological environment, and potential of tourism development (Duan, 2018); society, industry, natural resources and human capital (Kim and Choi, 2007); and human resources and convenience resources to attract tourists and income earned through networking activities in urban and rural areas (Kim and Kwon, 2009). Such studies have used quantitative methods such as the set-pair analysis (SPA) (He et al., 2022), the entropy weight TOPSIS method (Duan, 2018), and analytic hierarchy process (AHP) (Kim and Choi, 2007). However, there is still debate on how to evaluate the DPGT.
Overall, the research on DPGT is of great significance for the sustainable development of tourism in ECAs, while the relevant research has mainly focused on the quantitative analysis of factors influencing the sustainable development of tourism and the qualitative summary of development strategies in ECAs. Scant research exists on the quantitative evaluation and systematic model construction of DPGT in ECAs.
We have conducted this study in order to achieve the sustainable development of tourism in ECAs and to solve the complex problems caused by the participation of multiple actors. As such, we took Beijing’s Ecological Conservation Area (BECA) as the research area, constructed the model of DPGT in ECAs, analyzed the spatiotemporal evolution pattern of DPGT in BECA, and built the enhancement model of DPGT in BECA. The contributions of our study are threefold. First, our study expands the current discourse on DPGT to ECAs, which is a new geographical space and expands the scope of the spatial application of green tourism theory. Second, our study proposes a new method to measure DPGT in ECAs, which is somewhat innovative in terms of evaluation dimensions and calculation methods, and it can facilitate a comparative analysis of the DPGT in ECAs to uncover new theoretical insights and extend our understanding of green tourism development. Third, our study provides a systematic management framework for green tourism and regional green development in ECAs, which makes practical contributions for policy makers, and is of great significance for the high-quality development of Beijing and the construction of a beautiful China.

2 Methodology

2.1 Research area

The Master Plan of the City in Beijing (2016-2035) divides Beijing into the core area for capital functions, the expanded area for urban functions, the new area for urban development and the BECA. The BECA is located in the mountainous areas of the Beijing suburbs, including the Mentougou, Pinggu, Huairou, Miyun, and Yanqing Districts, as well as the mountainous areas of Fangshan District and Changping District. It covers 14 sub-districts, 79 towns and 15 townships, spanning a total area of 11259.3 km2 and accounting for 68% of the total area of Beijing. The mountainous area accounts for 89% of the BECA. There are three main reasons for selecting BECA as the research area. First, it is representative. The scale of tourism in BECA is large, as the revenue of rural tourism was 13.45×109 yuan in 2019, accounting for 93.18% of Beijing’s rural tourism revenue. Second, the problems it faces are typical. BECA is facing many problems such as ecological degradation and cultural crisis, while its tourism is developing rapidly. Third, there are guiding policies in BECA. For example, in 2021, the Beijing Municipal Government issued the “Implementation Opinions on Promoting Ecological Protection and Green Development in Ecological Conservation Areas”.

2.2 Research methods

2.2.1 Framework for the analysis of DPGT

Based on the principles of green, scientific, low-carbon and sustainable development, green tourism uses green technology to develop tourism resources scientifically and appropriately, creates a harmonious, green and friendly tourism environment, focuses on the content and quality of tourism, and shifts the traditional approach to tourism development into a modern approach to tourism development with coordinated economic, social and environmental development (Wei, 2011; Tang et al., 2022). Under the guidance of green tourism theory, the situation and process of the green tourism system in ECAs can be described as an interactive process involving the potential of green tourism resources, the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy (Hong et al., 2003; Tang et al., 2022; Wei et al., 2022; Zhang, 2023). Based on the research results and related applications of scholars on green tourism, combined with the characteristics of the green tourism system in ECAs and the connotations of these three factors, we can express the relationships between factors and construct the framework for the analysis of DPGT (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1 The framework for the analysis of DPGT
First, green tourism resources refer to those resources follow the concept of green development in the process of developing tourism resources, mainly including natural resources and human resources. Once green tourism resources are damaged, their recovery in the short term is difficult, which will inevitably hinder green development. Therefore, the potential of green tourism resources is the basis of DPGT in ECAs, and provides the material carriers for the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy (Duan, 2018). Second, green tourism ecology mainly includes environment capacity, resource carrying capacity and environmental quality, providing the basic physical environment for tourism to survive and develop. Therefore, the potential of green tourism ecology is a prerequisite for DPGT in ECAs, providing environmental safeguards for the potential of green tourism resources and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy (Liu and Tang, 2022). Third, the green tourism socio- economy refers to the promotion of green transformational development through technological innovation at the micro level, the ecological development of industries and the complete decoupling of economic growth from resources and environments at the meso level, and the regional improvement in quality and efficiency at the macro level. Therefore, the potential of the green tourism socio-economy is the core of DPGT in ECAs, which provides the developmental impetus for the potential of green tourism resources and the potential of green tourism ecology (Lu et al., 2019).

2.2.2 Indicator system for evaluating DPGT in ECAs

First, we systematically reviewed and analyzed the relevant literature on green tourism, the green development of tourism, ecotourism and sustainable tourism. Second, based on the framework for the analysis of DPGT and the status of tourism development in ECAs, we initially determined the indicator system for evaluating DPGT in ECAs from three dimensions of the potential of green tourism resources, the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy, with the principles of comprehensiveness, systematization, hierarchy and accessibility. Third, we held two rounds of consultation with 20 experts engaged in the fields of ecology, geography, the sustainable development of tourism and the protection and development of ECAs. After the first round of expert consultation, the indicator added was the proportion of A-level and above tourist attractions in the total local area, and the indicator deleted was number of tourism employees. After the second round of expert consultation, the indicator added was per capita environmental protection expenditure, and the indicator deleted was education expenditure per capita. Finally, the indicator system for evaluating DPGT in ECAs was determined, and it includes 34 indicators (Table 1). This indicator system focuses on the evaluation of indicators such as tourism resource protection, ecological environment measurement, environmental protection expenditure and science and technology expenditure, so it is different from the traditional indicator system for DPGT. In particular, our indicator system pays special attention to science and technology expenditures and environmental protection expenditures, which not only reflects the greater emphasis that green tourism places on green technology, but also incorporates relevant indicators of government action, which is innovative.
Table 1 Indicator system for evaluating DPGT in ECAs
Object level First-level indicator Second-level indicator Unit Attribute Weight References
DPGT in ECAs (A) Potential of green
tourism resources
(B1)		 Proportion of A-level and above tourist
attractions in the total local area (C1)		 % + 0.0299 -
Number of agricultural sightseeing parks (C2) + 0.0248 Zhang et al. (2018)
Number of cultural heritages (C3) + 0.0582 Zhang et al. (2016)
Number of national parks of China (C4) + 0.0206
Number of forest parks (C5) + 0.0195
Number of nature reserves (C6) + 0.0529
Number of historical and cultural towns
(villages) (C7)		 + 0.0782
Number of cultural protection units (C8) + 0.0492
Number of geoparks (C9) + 0.0582
Number of traditional villages (C10) + 0.0511
Potential of green
tourism ecology
(B2)		 Total energy consumption (C11) 104 t - 0.0565 Wo and Huang (2017)
SO2 concentration (C12) μg m-3 - 0.0219 Ko (2005); Yuan and
Xiang (2018)
NO2 concentration (C13) μg m-3 - 0.0092
PM10 concentration (C14) μg m-3 - 0.0061
Per capita waste discharge (C15) t person-1 - 0.0092 Tang et al. (2018)
Per capita sewage discharge (C16) m3 person-1 - 0.0124
Park area per capita (C17) m2 + 0.0161 Zhou et al. (2015)
Forest greening rate (C18) % + 0.0043 Angelstam et al. (2017)
Sewage treatment rate (C19) % + 0.0061
Harmless treatment rate of domestic
garbage (C20)		 % + 0.0007
Rate of decrease of energy consumption per
104 yuan GDP (C21)		 % + 0.0288
Potential of the
green tourism
socio-economy (B3)		 Total tourism revenue (C22) 108 yuan N 0.0257 Budeanu et al. (2016)
Proportion of total tourism revenue to GDP (C23) % N 0.0392 Zhen (2014)
Tourism consumption expenditure per
capita (C24)		 yuan N 0.0378 Carrillo and Jorge (2017)
Number of tourism companies (C25) N 0.0244 Tang et al. (2018)
Proportion of tourist attraction revenue in total tourism revenue (C26) % N 0.0277 Aratuo and Etienne (2019)
Proportion of travel agency revenue in total
tourism revenue (C27)		 % N 0.0806
Proportion of tourism accommodation income in
total tourism income (C28)		 % N 0.0211
Proportion of tourism catering revenue in total
tourism revenue (C29)		 % N 0.0120
Proportion of tourism business revenue in total
tourism revenue (C30)		 % N 0.0124
Proportion of tourism transportation revenue in
total tourism revenue (C31)		 % N 0.0149
Number of visitors (C32) 104 N 0.0248 Tian (2007)
Per capita environmental protection expenditure
(C33)		 104 yuan + 0.0257 Tian and Zhang (2018)
Per capita spending on science and technology (C34) 104 yuan + 0.0398 Vij and Vij (2012)

Note: + represents a positive indicator; - represents a reverse indicator; N represents a neutral indicator.

2.2.3 Measurement model

The coefficient of variation method and the weighted sum method were introduced to construct the measurement model of DPGT in ECAs. The coefficient of variation method is an objective weighting method, which can effectively avoid the artificial interference of subjective weighting methods, and has been applied in the evaluation of potential urban tourism development (Wang and Liang, 2015).
First, the range method and the average method were used to standardize the indicators.
When an indicator is positive,
y i j = x i j − min x j max x j − min x j , i = 1 , 2 , ⋯ , m ; j = 1 , 2 , ⋯ , n
When an indicator is negative,
y i j = max x j − x i j max x j − min x j , i = 1 , 2 , ⋯ , m ; j = 1 , 2 , ⋯ , n
When an indicator is neutral,
y i j = x i j x i j ¯ , w h e n   x i j ≤ x i j ¯ , i = 1 , 2 , ⋯ , m ; j = 1 , 2 , ⋯ , n
y i j = x i j ¯ x i j , w h e n   x i j > x i j ¯ , i = 1 , 2 , ⋯ , m ; j = 1 , 2 , ⋯ , n
where y i j, x i j, min x j, max x j, and x i j ¯ represent the standardized value, the actual statistical value, minimum value, maximum value, and average value of indicator j of the district i, respectively.
Second, the coefficient of variation of the indicator was determined.
V j = σ j x i j ¯
where V j, and σ j represent the coefficient of variation and standard deviation of indicator j, respectively.
Third, the weight W j of indicator j was determined.
W j = V j ∑ j = 1 n V j
where W j represents the weight of indicator j.
Fourth, the weighted sum method was used to calculate the potential value Q i.
Q i = 100 × ∑ j = 1 n y i j × W j
where Q i represents the potential value of indicator j.

2.2.4 Data sources

The data in this study were mainly obtained from various official statistics for 2011, 2014, 2017 and 2020. Indicators for the potential of green tourism resources were mainly obtained from Beijing Statistical Yearbook, Beijing Regional Statistical Yearbook and Beijing Municipal Bureau of Culture and Tourism. The indicators for the potential of green tourism ecology were mainly derived from Beijing Municipal Ecology and Environment Bureau, Beijing Eco-environmental Status Gazette and Beijing Regional Statistical Yearbook. The indicators for the potential of the green tourism socio-economy were mainly derived from Beijing Regional Statistical Yearbook, Beijing Municipal Bureau of Culture and Tourism and Statistical Bulletin of National Economic and Social Development of ECAs.
However, the data for the proportion of travel agency revenue in total tourism revenue, the proportion of tourism business revenue in total tourism revenue and some other indicators could not be obtained directly, since the updating of statistical caliber and statistical indicators are not directly linked to the article indicators, and other reasons. Therefore, we supplemented the data in this study through the calculation method, mean value method and median value method.

3 Results and analysis

3.1 The analysis of DPGT in BECA

3.1.1 The temporal characteristics of DPGT in BECA

As shown in Table 2, the DPGT in BECA showed an upward trend, with a growth rate of 20.68% from 2011 to 2020. This was mainly due to the continuous strengthening of the protection of green tourism resources, the protection of the ecological environment, the support of relevant policies, and the adjustment of the structure of the tourism industry. The DPGT in Yanqing District had the fastest growth rate of 31.25%. The potential of green tourism resources, the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy in Yanqing District all increased rapidly, with growth rates of 20.80%, 31.09% and 37.28%, respectively. There are three main reasons for this pattern. First, Yanqing District has strengthened the protection of its natural and cultural resources, resulting in an increase in the numbers of nature reserves, cultural protection units and traditional villages. In addition, it has increased the proportion of A-level and above tourist attractions in the total local area to enhance resource quality. Second, the district has strengthened the application of technology in ecological protection, which has led to further increases in the sewage treatment rate and the harmless treatment rate of domestic garbage. Third, the government’s financial support for green tourism development has led to an increase in the potential of the green tourism socio-economy. The growth rates of DPGT in the Mentougou, Pinggu, Huairou and Miyun Districts all exceeded 20%. The growth rate of the potential of green tourism ecology in Pinggu District was -13.34%, but the growth rates of the potential of green tourism resources and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy were 36.32% and 51.29% respectively. So the overall DPGT in Pinggu District still maintained a positive growth trend. The main reasons for the decline in the potential of green tourism ecology are the increase in the number of tourism enterprises, the further increase in per capita sewage discharge and the deteriorating air quality. The growth rate of the potential of the green tourism socio-economy in Mentougou District was -5.40%, but the growth rates of the potential of green tourism resources and the potential of green tourism ecology were 27.96% and 73.72%, respectively. So the overall DPGT in Mentougou District maintained a high rate of growth. It is worth noting that the DPGT in Fangshan District showed a declining trend, at a rate of 1.37%, and improvements in the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy need to receive more attention. The main reasons for the declines in the potential of the green tourism socio-economy in Mentougou District and Fangshan District are the large impact of the COVID-19 and limited government support, which have led to significant reductions in both local tourism revenue and visitor arrivals. The results show that the DPGT in BECA increased as a whole, but the DPGT values in each district present different characteristics, which require the implementation of differentiated management measures in the different districts.
Table 2 The potential value of the DPGT in BECA from 2011 to 2020
Item District 2011 2014 2017 2020 2011-2020 growth rate (%)
Qi-A Mentougou 43.87 59.43 59.26 54.56 24.37
Yanqing 46.59 57.71 57.79 61.15 31.25
Pinggu 41.73 47.27 52.83 50.39 20.75
Huairou 46.05 61.56 57.68 58.73 27.54
Miyun 44.40 57.87 57.63 54.13 21.91
Changping 42.35 51.01 52.96 50.17 18.47
Fangshan 42.33 59.00 51.57 41.75 -1.37
Qi-B1 Mentougou 10.48 14.47 14.80 13.41 27.96
Yanqing 10.00 11.73 11.75 12.08 20.80
Pinggu 3.91 4.78 4.63 5.33 36.32
Huairou 5.56 6.99 7.01 6.06 8.99
Miyun 7.11 8.65 8.74 8.66 21.80
Changping 10.49 12.03 12.52 12.08 15.16
Fangshan 15.70 22.57 22.46 18.23 16.11
Qi-B2 Mentougou 12.10 21.77 23.58 21.02 73.72
Yanqing 18.75 26.52 24.03 24.58 31.09
Pinggu 18.81 19.58 19.97 16.30 -13.34
Huairou 16.48 25.33 22.64 20.80 26.21
Miyun 16.52 22.12 18.23 19.90 20.46
Changping 13.68 18.75 19.10 17.93 31.07
Fangshan 5.82 14.18 5.05 5.01 -13.92
Qi-B3 Mentougou 21.29 23.18 20.88 20.14 -5.40
Yanqing 17.84 19.46 22.01 24.49 37.28
Pinggu 19.01 22.91 28.23 28.76 51.29
Huairou 24.02 29.24 28.02 31.87 32.68
Miyun 20.77 27.10 30.65 25.57 23.11
Changping 18.18 20.22 21.34 20.15 10.84
Fangshan 20.80 22.25 24.06 18.51 -11.01

Note: Qi-A, Qi-B1, Qi-B2, and Qi-B3 indicate the values of DPGT in BECA, the potential of green tourism resources, the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy, respectively.

3.1.2 The spatial characteristics of DPGT in BECA

Analyzing the spatial pattern and spatial changes in the DPGT of BECA has three purposes. First, we can get an overall picture of the spatial distribution patterns of the DPGT of BECA in different periods of time. Second, we can directly identify regional differences in the DPGT of BECA. Third, we can capture the changes in regional differences in the DPGT of BECA. Based on the spatial characterization, we can put forward different development proposals for the different districts, so as to contribute to the regional coordinated development of DPGT of BECA.
A Q-type cluster analysis of the DPGT in BECA was conducted using SPSS 19. The seven districts were classified into four levels based on their values of DPGT, where Ⅰ represents a high level, Ⅱ represents a relatively high level, Ⅲ represents a medium level, and Ⅳ represents low level (Table 3).
Table 3 Classification of the DPGT in BECA
District 2011 2014 2017 2020
Mentougou Ⅳ Ⅰ Ⅰ Ⅱ
Yanqing Ⅲ Ⅰ Ⅰ Ⅰ
Pinggu Ⅳ Ⅲ Ⅱ Ⅱ
Huairou Ⅲ Ⅰ Ⅰ Ⅰ
Miyun Ⅳ Ⅰ Ⅰ Ⅱ
Changping Ⅳ Ⅱ Ⅱ Ⅱ
Fangshan Ⅳ Ⅰ Ⅱ Ⅳ
As shown in Fig. 2, the DPGT in BECA showed a spatial distribution characteristic of high in the north and low in the south from 2011 to 2020, and it developed from the low level to the high level on the whole. There are three reasons for this distribution. First, the northern part of the BECA has a high potential of green tourism resources, with high mountains, rivers, the Miyun Reservoir, the Great Wall World Heritage Site, and a high quality for green tourism resources. Second, the northern part of the BECA relies on the Yanshan Mountain Range, so the air quality and ecological environment are better than in the southern part. Third, the topography and climate have made the northern part of the BECA develop faster economically than the southern part.
Fig. 2 Spatial differentiation of the DPGT in BECA
The DPGT in BECA was at the medium level and the low level in 2011. In 2014, the DPGT in more than 70% of the districts were at the high level and only the DPGT in Pinggu District was at the medium level. In 2017, the DPGT of all districts were at the high level or the relatively high level. In 2020, the DPGT in Fangshan District was at the low level. The DPGT in the Huairou and Yanqing Districts were at the high level in 2014, 2017 and 2020. The DPGT in the Miyun and Mentougou Districts were at the high level in 2014 and 2017, but they were at the relatively high level in 2020. This downward trend is concerning. The DPGT in Fangshan District showed a period of growth followed by a decline over a ten-year period, with the DPGT in 2020 being the same as in 2011. This stagnant situation needs to be taken into account. The DPGT in the Pinggu and Changping districts were gradually rising over the ten-year period, showing sustainable characteristics. These results show that although the DPGT in BECA is gradually increasing across the board, each district shows different development trends, with some districts showing sustainable development approaches and declining trends that are worthy of greater consideration and attention. In the future, there will still be a need for all stakeholders to pay more attention and take targeted measures to effectively enhance the DPGT in BECA.

3.2 Enhancement model of DPGT in BECA

In order to promote the construction of the ecological civilization and high-quality development in BECA, and based on a comprehensive analysis of the dynamic evolution of DPGT in BECA, this study constructed an enhancement model of DPGT in BECA. This enhancement model is based on the guideline of “zoning management, focused implementation”, with protective development of resources as the basic force, ecological optimization of the whole process as the sustainable force, high-quality building of industries as the core force, and the insistence on multi-subject participation as the guarantee force (Fig. 3).
Fig. 3 The enhancement model of DPGT in BECA

3.2.1 Protective development of resources to enhance the potential of green tourism resources

The potential of green tourism resources provides the material carriers for the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy, so it is the foundational force for the enhancement of DPGT in BECA. The potential of green tourism resources in Huairou District increased by just 8.99%, and it is a key district for enhancement. First, development plans must be produced scientifically. It is necessary for the Beijing Municipal Government to take the lead and, together with the governments of the districts in the BECA, to jointly produce a plan for the development of green tourism resources in BECA. This plan will ensure their scientific and orderly development and utilization based on conservation to maximize the economic benefits. Second, the ecological redline should be strictly defined. All interested parties should clarify their responsibilities and obligations, raise awareness of ecological protection and enhance their knowledge of ecological protection laws. Third, cultural resources need to be revitalized and utilized. It is crucial to systematically survey the various types of tangible and intangible cultural resources in BECA, determine the types and levels of protection that are needed, and formulate protection programs. In addition, it is important to establish the main role of local residents, develop and implement a talent introduction plan and train the inheritors of Beijing’s folk crafts. Fourth, a conservation development fund needs to be established. On one hand, a green tourism resource restoration project needs to be launched to immediately restore the natural resources and human resources. On the other hand, there is also a need to set up a funding program for green tourism resources, establish a research and training base for resource conservation and development, and recruit volunteers.

3.2.2 Ecological optimization of the whole process to enhance the potential of green tourism ecology

The potential of green tourism ecology provides environmental safeguards for the potential of green tourism resources and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy, and it is the sustainable force for the enhancement of DPGT in BECA. The Pinggu and Fangshan Districts are the key areas for improvement, with overall reductions in their potential of green tourism ecology of 13.34% and 13.92%, respectively. First, pre-ecological surveys need to be taken seriously. It is vital to investigate and analyze the natural and socio-economic environments in BECA, and to measure the environmental carrying capacity, including the social, natural, economic and psychological carrying capacities. Second, mid-ecological management needs to be strengthened. There is a need to establish a platform for evaluating the ecological quality of BECA and to enter the data on this platform in real time using time as the main dimension. It is also important to establish a database on the ecology of tourism in BECA, to monitor the impacts of economic and social activities on the local ecological environment, and to evaluate the quality and impact on a time scale. Third, post- ecological maintenance needs to be carried out. The first priority is to establish an information monitoring system and early warning system to maintain the tourism ecological environment and quality of BECA. In addition, the overall management of the local ecological environment needs to be carried out through the joint collaboration of the environmental protection departments of the Beijing government and other relevant management departments.

3.2.3 High-quality building of industries to enhance the potential of the green tourism socio-economy

The potential of the green tourism socio-economy provides the developmental impetus for the potential of green tourism resources and the potential of green tourism ecology, and it is the core force for the enhancement of DPGT in BECA. The Mentougou and Fangshan Districts are the key areas for improvement, with overall reductions in the potential of their green tourism socio-economies of 5.40% and 11.01%, respectively. First, the structure of the tourism product needs to be improved. There is an urgent need to deeply explore the natural and cultural resources of green tourism and to develop multi-level, high-quality tourism products in a market-oriented manner. Attention also should be paid to building a tourism brand, triggering a brand effect, and using this as an opportunity to build a whole industry chain model and form a virtuous, self-perpetuating eco-industrial circle. Second, the all-for-one tourism approach needs to be pushed forward. In the context of tourism for all and the experience economy, BECA should accelerate the process of all-for-one tourism, promote the integration of multiple regulations and overall optimization, comprehensively promote the iterative upgrading of the tourism industry in BECA, and make green tourism play a leading role in the development of the whole region. Third, the benefits need to be reasonably distributed. It is important to strengthen the cooperation among the government, enterprises and the public, and to establish a reasonable benefit distribution mechanism by combining the initial cost input, the amount of labor in the medium term and the return at the end. This mechanism should guarantee fairness and transparency in the distribution of benefits, with flexible adjustments according to the actual situation. Fourth, financial expenditure needs to be increased. There is a need not only to increase the financial expenditures on green development, tourism industry development, science and technology and education development, but also to introduce relevant policies.

3.2.4 Insist on multi-subject participation and raise awareness of green development

Multiple stakeholders, including the government, enterprises, residents and tourists, play an important role in the development of green tourism in BECA, so the insistence on multi-subject participation is a guarantee force for the enhancement of DPGT in BECA. Fangshan District is the key area for improvement, with an overall reduction in the DPGT of 1.37%. First, the government should develop a good top-level design from the macro perspective. The government of BECA needs to formulate laws, regulations, industrial policies and development plans related to green tourism in BECA in order to strengthen its guidance and support for the development of green tourism in the region. The tourism authorities should take the lead, with the participation of relevant departments, to bring together the whole region and form a working model of upward and downward linkages. Second, enterprises should strengthen their green practices from the meso perspective. Tourism enterprises should be fully aware of the necessity and importance of protecting the green tourism resources and the ecological environment in BECA, establish views of integrality and coordination, build a tourism product system around the brand and launch green marketing to expand the market radius. Third, the residents and tourists should establish the concept of green development from a micro perspective. There is a need to strengthen the publicity and education of green tourism development among the local residents and tourists in BECA, so as to raise their level of awareness of green tourism development.

4 Discussion

This study contributes to the literature on this important topic in three ways. First, we expand the current discourse on DPGT to ECAs, which is a new geographical space and expands the scope of the spatial application of green tourism theory. This study took BECA as the research area, enriching the types of green tourism development from a geospatial perspective and expanding the scope of application of green tourism theory. Based on the connotation of ecotourism, some scholars have evaluated the ecotourism potential of four highlands in China and nine cities in Jilin province. In contrast, the research area of this study focuses on BECA, which can enrich the theory of green tourism from a micro perspective and lead to the development of more targeted practical measures (Shi and Yang, 2019; Zhang et al., 2021).
Second, our study proposes a new method to measure the DPGT in ECAs, which can extend our understanding of green tourism development. Based on the theory of green tourism, this study constructed a framework for the analysis of DPGT, and built an indicator system for evaluating DPGT in ECAs from the three dimensions of the potential of green tourism resources, the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy. It also introduced the coefficient of variation method and the weighted sum method to build a measurement model. This new method is somewhat innovative in terms of evaluation dimensions and calculation methods, which can facilitate a comparative analysis of the DPGT in ECAs to uncover new theoretical insights. He et al. (2022) constructed an indicator system for evaluating DPGT from the four aspects of green tourism market, green tourism resources, green tourism support force and green tourism binding force. Duan (2018) constructed a model of the resource potential of green tourism from the four dimensions of potential of the tourism landscape resources, potential of the visitor market, potential of the ecological environment, and the potential of tourism development. Although these authors all recognized the importance of green tourism resources, the ecological environment and socio-economic development, they ignored the factors of green technology and government support. Therefore, the indicator system in this study incorporated the two indicators of per capita environmental protection expenditure (C33) and per capita spending on science and technology (C34) into the indicator system, which filled this gap. Although Kim and Choi (2007) innovatively incorporated human capital into the indicator system for evaluating DPGT, they ignored the support of the ecological elements. Furthermore, the indicator system in this study took ecological protection as the main dimension.
Third, this study provides a systematic management framework for green tourism and regional green development in ECAs, which makes a practical contribution for policy makers. For example, the policy makers of BECA could use “zoning management, focused implementation” as the guideline, protective development of resources as the basic force, ecological optimization of the whole process as the sustainable force, high-quality building of industries as the core force, and the insistence on multi-subject participation as the guarantee force. This approach can enhance the DPGT in BECA by improving the potential of green tourism resources, the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy. Plotnikova (2018) pointed out that the development of green tourism is the basis for increasing the competitiveness of a region, and analyzed substantiating factors and mechanisms of the development of green tourism and their consequences. Tang et al. (2022) evaluated the green development level of tourism in Ecological Conservation Areas and analyzed the main factors influencing them. Unfortunately, neither of those studies proposed an enhancement model. However, the enhancement model of DPGT in BECA built in this paper provides a useful reference for green tourism and regional green development in ECAs, and is of great significance for the high-quality development of Beijing and the construction of a beautiful China.

5 Conclusions

This study took BECA as the research area, constructed a framework for the analysis of DPGT and an indicator system for evaluating DPGT in ECAs, introduced the coefficient of variation method and the weighted sum method to build a measurement model to analyze the spatial-temporal evolution of DPGT in BECA, and built the enhancement model of DPGT in BECA. The main findings are as follows.
First, DPGT in BECA has obvious spatial and temporal heterogeneity, with both overall gradual changes and individual abrupt changes, which will require differentiated management measures to be implemented in the different regions. From 2011 to 2020, the DPGT in BECA has been rising; while the spatial distribution of DPGT in BECA shows a pattern of high in the north and low in the south. Second, this study constructed the model of DPGT in BECA, with “zoning management, focused implementation” as the guideline, protective development of resources as the basic force, ecological optimization of the whole process as the sustainable force, high-quality building of industries as the core force, and the insistence on multi-subject participation as the guarantee force. This approach can enhance the DPGT in BECA by improving the potential of green tourism resources, the potential of green tourism ecology and the potential of the green tourism socio-economy.

6 Limitations and future research

There are some limitations in this study. First, since township data could not be collected, we took the entire areas of Fangshan District and Changping District into consideration, which may affect the accuracy of the results. Future research could use geographic information technology and other methods to improve the efficiency and accuracy of data collection. Second, we only took BECA as the research area, so the applicability of the evaluation indicator system for DPGT in other research areas may be difficult to judge, and its scientific validity and applicability still need to be further verified. It is also necessary to further verify the applicability of the indicator system through comparative analyses of multiple cities in the future. Third, as this study analyzed the spatial and temporal evolution characteristics of the DPGT in BECA based on only four individual years of data, the study results can only provide an overall trend of change. Future research could collect data over a continuous period of time to more accurately characterize the spatial and temporal evolution of the DPGT in BECA.

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
[1]
Angelstam P, Khaulyak O, Yamelynets T, et al. 2017. Green infrastructure development at European Union’s eastern border: Effects of road infrastructure and forest habitat loss. Journal of Environmental Management, 193: 300-311.

DOI PMID

[2]
Aratuo D N, Etienne X L. 2019. Industry level analysis of tourism-economic growth in the United States. Tourism Management, 70: 333-340.

DOI

[3]
Budeanu A, Miller G, Moscardo G, et al. 2016. Sustainable tourism, progress, challenges and opportunities: An introduction. Journal of Cleaner Production, 111: 285-294.

DOI

[4]
Carrillo M, Jorge J M. 2017. Multidimensional analysis of regional tourism sustainability in Spain. Ecological Economics, 140: 89-98.

DOI

[5]
Duan T T. 2018. Comprehensive evaluation of green tourist resources potential based on entropy TOPSIS—A case study of Funiu Mountain Region. Journal of Zhongzhou University, 35(2): 36-41. (in Chinese)

[6]
He D S, Liu H, Xue Z Q. 2010. Studies on the development of rural tourism of Beijing Ecological Conservation Development Area. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 31(1): 43-46. (in Chinese)

[7]
He X R, Qin Q, Liu Y. 2022. Evaluation of development potential of green tourism: A case study of Zhangjiajie, Hunan Province. Guangdong Forestry Science and Technology, 38(2): 42-51. (in Chinese)

[8]
Hong S, Kim S, Kim J. 2003. Implications of potential green tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(2): 323-341.

DOI

[9]
Kim D S, Choi H S. 2007. Development of green-tourism potential evaluation method for rural villages considering amenity and human resources. Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning, 13(2): 7-16.

[10]
Kim D S, Kwon Y D. 2009. A study on survey and analysis of green-tourism potential in rural tourist villages. Journal of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers, 51(3): 15-24.

[11]
Ko T G. 2005. Development of a tourism sustainability assessment procedure: A conceptual approach. Tourism Management, 26(3): 431-445.

DOI

[12]
Li Y Y, Huang S, Zhang B, et al. 2019. Discussion on evaluation of ecological service value and ecological compensation mechanism of Beijing Ecological Conservation Area. Environmental Conformity Assessment, 11(5): 94-99, 106. (in Chinese)

[13]
Liu Y Q, Tang X J. 2022. Spatio-temporal evolution characteristics and influencing mechanism of green development efficiency of tourism industry in China. Journal of Natural Resources, 37(3): 681-700. (in Chinese)

DOI

[14]
Lu X J, Shi P F, Deng Z W, et al. 2019. Calculation of green production efficiency of tourism in the Yangtze River Economic Belt and analysis of its spatial and temporal evolution. China Population, Resources and Environment, 29(7): 19-30. (in Chinese)

[15]
Ma C, Wang X Y, Zhang Y X, et al. 2017. Emergy analysis of ecosystem services supply and flow in Beijing Ecological Conservation Area. Acta Geographica Sinica, 72(6): 974-985. (in Chinese)

DOI

[16]
Plotnikova M. 2018. Green tourism development in smart communities. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 4(3): 203-210.

DOI

[17]
Qiu C L. 2021. Legal safeguards for ecological protection in ecotourism development. Tourism Tribune, 36(9): 10-12. (in Chinese)

[18]
Shi D, Yang H. 2019. Research on evaluation model of the ecotourism development potential and its empirical analysis based on the multi-level grey evaluation method. Chinese Journal of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, 40(2): 40-48. (in Chinese)

[19]
Tang C C, Zheng Q Q, Wang X D, et al. 2019. Discussion on the model of green development of tourism in traditional village. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 33(2): 203-208. (in Chinese)

[20]
Tang C C, Wu X F, Zheng Q Q, et al. 2018. Ecological security evaluations of the tourism industry in Ecological Conservation Development Areas: A case study of Beijing’s ECDA. Journal of Cleaner Production, 197: 999-1010.

DOI

[21]
Tang C C, Zheng Q Q, Zhong Q L. 2022. Evaluation of the green development level of tourism in Ecological Conservation Areas: A case study of Beijing. Sustainable Development, 30(6): 1634-1654.

DOI

[22]
Tian L. 2007. Research on evaluation model of sustainable development of regional tourism—A case study of Dali, Lijiang and Xishuangbanna in Yunnan. Tourism Science, (3): 44-51, 71. (in Chinese)

[23]
Tian L, Zhang Z B. 2018. Evolution characteristics and influencing factors of green growth in China’s tourism industry. Journal of ShanDong Normal University (Social Sciences), 63(1): 116-125. (in Chinese)

[24]
Vij M, Vij A. 2012. Tourism and carbon foot prints in United Arab Emirates: Challenges and solutions. Journal of Environmental Management and Tourism, 3(1): 41-54.

[25]
Votsi N E P, Mazaris A D, Kallimanis A S, et al. 2014. Natural quiet: An additional feature reflecting green tourism development in conservation areas of Greece. Tourism Management Perspectives, (11): 10-17.

[26]
Wang G X, Liang L K. 2015. The evaluation on the urban tourism development potential in Shanxi Province. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 29(9): 203-208. (in Chinese)

[27]
Wang H M, Wang H E, Sun H Y, et al. 2012. Assessment of the ecological security in the Three Gorges Reservoir area by using the ecological footprint method. Journal of Mountain Science, 9(6): 891-900.

DOI

[28]
Wei M. 2011. A research on green tourism development model based on low carbon economy. Economic Management Journal, 33(2): 102-108. (in Chinese)

[29]
Wei M, Wei H, Huang H. 2022. Evaluation system of green tourism industry. Tourism Analysis, 27(1): 47-62.

DOI

[30]
Wo X M, Huang S. 2017. Green efficiency of China’s tourism industry—A modified three-stage DEA model analysis. Technoeconomics & Management Research, (4): 8-13. (in Chinese)

[31]
Yuan B L, Xiang Q L. 2018. Environmental regulation, industrial innovation and green development of Chinese manufacturing: Based on an extended CDM model. Journal of Cleaner Production, 176: 895-908.

DOI

[32]
Zhang J K. 2023. A multidimensional perspective on the relationship between tourism and green growth. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, in press. DOI: 10.1080/09669582.2023.2276039.

[33]
Zhang L. 2009. Beijing Mountain functional zoning and relative policies. Economic Geography, 29(6): 989-994. (in Chinese)

[34]
Zhang M, Liu Y M, Wu J, et al. 2018. Index system of urban resource and environment carrying capacity based on ecological civilization. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 68: 90-97.

DOI

[35]
Zhang X, Lu L, Zhang H H, et al. 2021. Evaluation of China’s plateau ecotourism development potential. Economic Geography, 41(8): 195-203. (in Chinese)

[36]
Zhang Y J. 2014. Three conditions for sustainable ecotourism to be realised. Tourism Tribune, 29(4): 5-7. (in Chinese)

[37]
Zhang Y M, Dang C M, Tang C S, et al. 2016. Research on coordination degree of Beijing, Tianjin and Hebei regional tourism based on niche assessment. Ecological Economy, 32(7): 148-152, 223. (in Chinese)

[38]
Zhen Y. 2014. Research of low carbon development evaluation of the regional tourism industry based on the sustainability of barometer: Taking Zhangjiajie as an example. Ecological Economy, 30(1): 269-272. (in Chinese)

[39]
Zhou B, Zhong L S, Chen T, et al. 2015. Spatio-temporal pattern and obstacle factors of ecological security of tourism destination: A case of Zhejiang Province. Scientia Geographica Sinica, 35(5): 599-607. (in Chinese)

DOI

Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉