Yerel Halkın Milli Parklara Yönelik Çevresel Kimlik, Çevresel Tutum ve Katılım Yaklaşımları

Öz

Milli parklar sahip olduğu doğal ve kültürel değerler yönüyle korunması gereken alanlar arasında bulunmaktadır. Bu alanların sürdürülebilirliğini sağlamak, ekosistemlerini ve biyolojik çeşitliliğini başarılı bir şekilde korumak için yerel halkın katılımı önem arz etmektedir. Türkiye’de toplam 45 milli park bulunmaktadır. Kastamonu ise bu parkların üçüne ev sahipliği yapmaktadır. Bu araştırmada, milli parklara yönelik çevresel kimlik, çevresel tutum ve katılım ilişkisinin Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi ile çözümlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda Kastamonu yerel halkından kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle 399 katılımcıya ulaşılmış ve anket uygulanmıştır. Analizler sonucunda çevresel kimliğin çevresel tutumu, çevresel tutumun da katılımı etkilediği tespit edilmiştir. Bununla beraber yerel halkın doğal alanları ziyaret etme sıklığı, doğa koruma derneğine üye olma durumu, memleketi ve ilde yaşama süresinin çevresel kimlik, çevresel tutum ve katılım boyutlarına göre istatistiksel açıdan anlamlı farklılıklar gösterdiği tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Çevresel kimlik
• Çevresel tutum
• Katılım
• Milli parklar
• Kastamonu

Local People's Environmental Identity, Environmental Attitude and Participation Approaches Towards National Parks

Öz

National parks are among the areas that should be protected in terms of their natural and cultural values. Participation of local people is important to ensure the sustainability of these areas and to protect their ecosystems and biodiversity successfully. There are 45 national parks in Turkey. Kastamonu is home to three of these parks. In this study, it is aimed to analyze the relationship between environmental identity, environmental attitude and participation towards national parks with Structural Equation Modeling. For this purpose, 399 participants from Kastamonu local people were reached using the convenience sampling method and a questionnaire was applied. As a result of the analysis, it was determined that environmental identity affects environmental attitude and environmental attitude affects participation. However, it was determined that the frequency of visiting natural areas of the local people, the status of being a member of the nature conservation association, their hometown and the duration of life in the province showed statistically significant differences according to environmental identity, environmental attitude and participation dimensions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Environmental identity
• Environmental attitude
• Participation
• National parks
• Kastamonu

Kaynakça

1. Referans1- Abun, D. ve Racoma, A. (2017). Environmental Attitude and Environmental Behavior of Catholic Colleges’ Employees in Ilocos Sur, Philippines, Texıla International Journal of Academic Research, 4 (1): 23-52.
2. Referans2-Akkuş, Ç. ve Akkuş, G. (2020). Yerel Halkın Kültürel Mirası Korumaya Katılma Tutumu Ve Turizmi Destekleme Davranışının Demografik Özelliklerine Göre İncelenmesi, Turkish Studies - Social, 15(3): 887-904.
3. Referans3- Altunışık, R., Çoşkun, R., Bayraktaroğlu, S. ve Yıldırım, E. (2012). Sosyal Bilimlerde Araştırma Yöntemleri SPSS Uygulamalı. Geliştirilmiş 7. Baskı, Sakarya Yayıncılık.
4. Referans4- Bagozzi, R. P. ve Dholakia, U. M. (2002). Intentıonal Social Action in Virtual Communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 16 (2): 2-21.
5. Referans5- Bayram, N. (2016). Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş Amos Uygulamaları. Bursa: Ezgi Kitabevi.
6. Referans6- Bello, F. G., Carr, N., & Lovelock, B. (2016). Community Participation Framework for Protected Area-Based Tourism Planning. Tourism Planning & Development, 13(4): 469-485.
7. Referans7- Bern, G. N. ve Simpson, S. (2009). Outdoor Recreation Participation and Environmental Concern: A Research Summary, Journal of Experiential Education, 32 (1), 79-91.
8. Referans8- Buzlukçu, C. (2020). Yerel Halkın Yer Kimliği, Topluluğa Bağlılığı, Sürdürülebilir Turizm Tutumu, Turizmin Gelişimini Destekleme Tutumu ve Yaşam Memnuniyeti İlişkisi. (Yayınlanmış Doktora Tezi). Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.

9. Referans9- Cheng, T. M., Wu, H. C., Wang, J. T. M. ve Wu, M. R. (2019). Community Participation As a Mediating Factor on Residents’ Attitudes Towards Sustainable Tourism Development and Their Personal Environmentally Responsible Behaviour. Current Issues in Tourism, 22(14): 1764-1782.
10. Referans10- Clayton, S. (2003). Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition. İçinde S. Clayton & S. Opotow (Editörler). Identity And The Natural Environment The Psychological Significance Of Nature (ss. 45–65). MIT Press.
11. Referans11- Clayton, S. ve Opotow, S. (2003). Identity and the natural environment: The psychological significance of nature. MIT Press.
12. Referans12- Çetinkaya, G. (2015). Doğa Sporlarına Katılım Çevre Tutumunu Etkiler mi? Üniversite Öğrencileri Üzerine Bir Araştırma, Ankara Üniversitesi Spor Bilimleri Fakültesi, 13 (2), 137-142.
13. Referans13- Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Müdürlüğü. (2020). http://ilgazdagi.tabiat.gov.tr/ adresinden alınmıştır (Ziyaret tarihi 30.10.2020).
14. Referans14- Eliam, E. ve Trop, T. (2012). Environmental Attitudes and Environmental Behavior-Which Is the Horse and Which Is the Cart?, Sustainability, 4 (12):2210-2246.
15. Referans15- Erdoğan, N. (2003). Çevre ve (Eko)turizm. Ankara: Erk Yayıncılık
16. Referans16- Gifford, R. ve Sussman, R. (2012). Environmental Attitudes: The Oxford Hanbook of Environmental and Conservation Psychology (Clayton, S.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
17. Referans17- Gürbüz, S. (2019). Amos ile Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
18. Referans18- Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J. ve Anderson, R. E. (2009). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th Edition). USA: Prentice Hall.
19. Referans19- Hinds, J. ve Sparks, P. (2008). Engaging with The Natural Environment:The Role of Affective Connection and Identity, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28, 109–120.
20. Referans20- Kashima, Y., Paladino, A. ve Margetts, E. A. (2014). Environmentalist Identity and Environmental Striving, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38, 64–75.
21. Referans21- Kempton, W. Ve Holland, D. (2003). Identity and Sustained Environmental Practice. İçinde S. Clayton & S. Opotow (Editörler.), Identity and The Natural Environment The Psychological Significance Of Nature (ss. 317–341). MIT Press.
22. Referans22- Kutay Karaçor, E. ve Akçam, E. (2016). Yer Kimliği, Toplum Duyusu ve Çevresel Tutum Değişkenleri Arasındaki Kavramsal İlişkinin Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesi İle Açıklanması. Turkish Journal of Forestry, 17(2): 194-200.
23. Referans23- Küre Dağları Milli Parkı. (2020). https://www.kdmp.gov.tr/kure-daglari-milli-parki adresinden alınmıştır (Ziyaret tarihi: 30.10.2020).
24. Referans24- Lachapelle, P. R. ve McCool, S. F. (2004). Exploring the Concept of “Ownership” in Natural Resource Planning, Society and Natural Resources, 18, 279–28.
25. Referans25- Lake, W. (2019). Conflict in the Consumer Identity: The Coexistence and Consequences of Environmental Identity and Material Identity, Phd Thesis, The University of Adelaide Business School.
26. Referans26- Lewis, J. (2015). Preserving and maintaining the concept of Letchworth Garden City, Planning Perspectives, 30(1): 153-163.
27. Referans27- Milfont, T.L. ve Duckitt, J. (2004). The Structure of Environmental Attitudes: A First-And Second-Order Confirmatory Factor Analysis, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(3): 289-303.
28. Referans28- Sapoetra, N. D., Ridwan, R., Sahide, M. A. K.ve Masuda, K. (2019). Local Community’s Perception, Attitude, and Participation towards Different Level Management of Geopark: A Comparison Geosite Case Study, Between Muroto Cape and Rammang-Rammang Geosite, IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science, 343, 012044.
29. Referans29- Schultz, P.W., Shriver, C., Tabanico, J.J. ve Khazian, A.M. (2004). Implicit Connections with Nature, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 31-42.
30. Referans30- Shrestha, R. ve Alavalapati, J. R. (2006). Linking Conservation and Development: An Analysis of Local People’s Attitude towards Koshi Tappu Wildlife Reserve, Nepal. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 8, 69–84.
31. Referans31- Sirivongs, K. ve Tsuchiya, T. (2012). Relationship between Local Residents' Perceptions, Attitudes and Participation Towards National Protected Areas: A Case Study of Phou Khao Khouay National Protected Area, Central Lao PDR. Forest Policy and Economics, 21, 92-100.
32. Referans32- So, K. F. K., King, C., Sparks, B. A. ve Wang, Y. (2013). The Influence of Customer Brand İdentification on Hotel Brand Evaluation and Loyalty Development. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 34, 31–41.
33. Referans33- Stets, J. E. ve Biga, C. F. (2003). Bringing Identity Theory into Environmental Sociology, Sociological Theory, 21, 398–423.
34. Referans34- Su, L., Huang, S. (S) ve Pearce, J. (2019). Toward A Model of Destination Resident-Environment Relationship: The Case of Gulangyu, China, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 36 (4): 469–483.
35. Referans35- Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı, (2021). https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/DKMP/Menu/27/Milli-Parklar adresinden alınmıştır (Ziyaret tarihi: 21.01.2021).
36. Referans36- Teeroovengadum, V. (2019). This Present Research Provides Evidence That Environmental İdentity Has a Major Role to Play İn Explaining The Behaviours of Tourists towards Ecotourism Products and Service, Tourism Review, 74 (2): 280-292.
37. Referans37- Tosun, C. (2000). Limits to Community Participation in The Tourism Development Process in Developing Countries. Tourism Management, 21(6): 613-633.
38. Referans38-Tukamushaba, E. K. ve Okech, R. N. (2011). Tourism Training and Education, Community Empowerment and Participation in Tourism Planning and Development. A Case of Uganda, Journal of Tourism, 12(1): 78-101.
39. Referans39- Wang, Q. ve Yamamoto, H. (2009). Local Residents' Perception, Attitude and Participation Regarding Nature Reserves of China: Case Study of Beijing Area, Journal of Forest Planning, 14(2): 67-77.
40. Referans40- Van der Werff, E., Steg, L. ve Keizer, K. (2013). The Value of Environmental Self-Identity: The Relationship Between Biospheric Values, Environmental Self-İdentity and Environmental Preferences, İntentions and Behaviour, Journal of Environmental Psychology, 34, 55–63.