Małgorzata Gałązka
Józef Piłsudski University of Physical Education in Warsaw
various definitions of the concept of sustainable tourism – some treat it as a tool for achieving sustainability, while others believe it to be an instrument supporting the growth of tourism as such (Żabińska, 2000). But it does not change the fact that it is a harmonious process in all the areas of human life and activity that should be a compromise between environmental, social and economic needs of contemporary and future generations (Zawilińska, 2010). The activities within the framework of sustainable tourism should be characterized with the optimal use of natural resources, ensuring long-term, real economic processes that benefit and respect for attitudes (interest) of local communities (Buckley, 2009).
Since the idea of sustainable tourism requires a certain compromise, entities responsible for the growth of tourism in a given location are obliged to solve problems related to the conflict of various stakeholders’ strategic goals (Brelik, 2010). Each group has to self-limit itself for the sake of common good, namely sustainable tourism. Each attempt to increase a given stakeholder’s gains at the expense of another stakeholder always upsets the system and hinders the continuation of sustainability policy. Such limitations can be related, for instance, to deterioration of the quality of services offered to tourists, accepting ‘outsiders’
by the local community in their place of residence, designating certain areas within protected areas, or reduction of profits for service providers. Hence, reaching the compromise is one of the key tasks for entities planning the growth of tourist regions, as it is essential to convince shareholders about benefits that can result from prioritising common good over one’s own interest.
One of the key principles of sustainable tourism is to support local economy and to activate the local community, stimulating the growth of tourism. Therefore tourism should rely on local resources and inhabitants’ initiatives, ensuring financial or other benefits or improved standard and quality of life (Zaręba, 2010). It should be noted that the local community is involved in the development of tourism and the creation of the tourism product in a directly way (eg. working in services), as well as indirectly (not engaging in economic activities but having affect on atmosphere of the place) (Niezgoda, 2010).
Because of economic concerns active involvement
of local community in the process of planning and managing tourism is important as then money spent by tourists is more likely to stay in the region.
Protected areas are perceived in the modern world as the driving force, a kind of mainspring of sustainable growth of rural areas, as profits generated by tourism not only create jobs, and increase income, but first of all have very positive impact on supporting the needs of local communities (Parks for biodiversity, 1999).
Nevertheless, the chances of implementing the assumptions of sustainable tourism in a given area successfully are determined to the largest extent by attitudes and motivations of the local community.
It should be actively involved in such initiatives, but foremost it should see the sense and benefits of tourism in their place of residence (Kowalczyk, 2010).
Materials and methods
In order to gather opinions of local authorities on the development of tourism in Kampinos NP and Kampinos district, and to gauge opportunities for sustainable tourism there, an interview was conducted with a representative of the Kampinos Municipal Council.
Additionally, a survey was conducted among Kampinos district inhabitants not running any tourist business, as it was assumed that gaining profits from this type of activity would change the perception of issues explored in this research.
45% of 111 individuals surveyed were aged 25-44, while 25% were aged up to 24. Those aged over 65 and 45-64 accounted for 15% of the sample each. Most respondents had secondary (56%) or higher education (26%), while those with primary or vocational education accounted for 9%
of the sample each.
34% of the respondents were white collars, while students and pupils accounted for 19% of the sample. Others included blue collars (13%), old age and disability pensioners (10%), housewives (9%) and entrepreneurs (7%). Few of them were unemployed (4%), farmers (3%) and selected the
‘other’ answer (1%).
Exactly half of individuals surveyed (50%) live in the Kampinos NP buffer zone, i.e. 1 km from its border. Others live either more than 1 km from the Park (42%) or within the Kampinos NP borders
(8%). What is important is that most respondents (68%) have been living there since they were born, and most other individuals moved there over 10 years ago. The largest % of individuals live in:
Kampinos (46%), Wiejca (16%), Komorów (6%), Strzyżew (6%), Wola Pasikońska (6%), Pasikonie (5.5%), Łazy (4%), Podkampinos (4%), Other towns or villages in the district were mentioned by less than 2% of the respondents.
. For the statistical analysis of correlation between qualitative variables the chi-square test of independence was utilised at the confidence level of 0.05, checking the power of association by means of the Cramér's V (with ordinal scale) determining the Kendall’s τ (tau) coefficient. To analyse the relation between the quantitative and qualitative variable Mann-Whitney and the Kruskal-Wallis nonparametric tests were used (both at confidence level of 0.05). In no cases any statistically significant differences between variables assumed (gender, age, place of residence within the district) were observed
Results
Tourism in the Kampinos district
The Kampinos district is located in the north-western part of the Mazowieckie province, bordering on Łowicko-Błońska Plain and Warszawska Valley. Kępa Błońska is the natural border between sandy and wetland areas of Kampinos Forest to the north and the high and sandy terrace of the Błońska Plain to the south (Strategia rozwoju gminy Kampinos do 2020 roku, 2003). The flat Plain is virtually deprived of any forested areas which in the entire district account for 19% only, compared to arable lands accounting for ca. 73% of the total area of the district (Strategia rozwoju gminy Kampinos...,2003).
Kampinos is one of eight districts within which Kampinos NP is located. The Park occupies ca.
34% of its area.
Short distance to Warsaw and attractiveness of living in Kampinos related to that generate a constant inflow of new inhabitants (close connection, vicinity of a national park, free investment areas, and relatively small prices of land). Every year the number of district inhabitants grows, mostly because of migration of capital residents.
Because of its rich history, convenient location, and first of all excellent tourist value, Kampinos has excellent conditions for the growth of tourism.
Unquestionably the key environmental highlight of the district is the Kampinos NP and two strictly protected areas within it: Nart which protects the oldest dense pine stand in the Polish plain to the west of Vistula River, with average age of 200 years, and Granica, which is one of the oldest sections of the Kampinos Forest, with protected dune ridges and parabolic dunes on the verge of wetlands, as well as tree stands that are up to 150 year old (Zielony, 2004). Particularly valuable cultural objects within this area include archaeological sites most of which are under preservation maintenance or are waiting to registered as such. Other objects worth mentioning include historic mansions from the nineteenth or early twentieth century in Kampinoskie, Krubice, Szczytno or Strzyżew, and a wooden baroque church in Kampinos.
The tourist infrastructure (accommodation and catering) in the Kampinos district is very poor.
Accommodation facilities include only farmhouses, 11 of which function in Kampinos, Pasikonie, Zawady and Podkampinos, etc. They offer accommodation in either guest rooms or summer cottages, some of them all year long.
There is also no rental facility offering bicycles or canoes, but there is one horse stud.4
The Kampinos district has developed its growth strategy (Strategia rozwoju gminy Kampinos do 2020 roku, Urząd Gminy Kampinos, 2003), with tourism as one of its key components. In order to prioritise tourism, local authorities intend to update the current local spatial management plan with regards to tourist and leisure initiatives, expand the tourist and leisure infrastructure in the Kampinos NP buffer zone (mostly car parks), develop and implement the tourist trail programme (chiefly for hikers and bicycles), support the growth of farmhouses and development of tourist information and promotion system, and create tourist products in cooperation with neighbouring districts that are administratively affiliated to Kampinos NP. What is noteworthy is that the district is aware of its very poor tourist and leisure infrastructure, and it sees its opportunities in growing tourism, mostly of weekend character.
4 Dane uzyskane w trakcie wywiadu kwestionariuszowego przeprowadzonego w Urzędzie Gminy.
Kampinos was the originator of the ‘Między Wisłą a Kampinosem/Between Vistula and Kampinos’ Local Initiative Group which at the time being includes 7 districts, one poviat, and numerous associations and companies. Its strategy allowed for acquiring PLN 12 million (Tymoftyjewicz, 2010) allotted to building fairgrounds, small sports facilities, and street lights. Another pivotal investment carried out in 2009-2010 and financed from the local budget and the Rural Area Growth Programme was the establishment of a park in the centre of Kampinos.
This venture has had positive impact on building local identity, it satisfies social and cultural needs, and it has improved the aesthetic value of the village.
Kampinos has so far not conducted any research devoted to tourism, e.g. number of visitors, which is why it does not have exact statistical data on the scale of its tourist traffic. The district representatives believe that within the last 5 years the intensity of tourist traffic has not changed considerably, and visitors come for purely recreational purposes, or in order to practise various forms of adventure tourism. What is interesting, however, is that local authorities do not believe Kampinos NP to attract tourists, in spite of the fact that it is the most valuable environmental highlight of the district. Taking into account the growth of sustainable tourism, local authorities should get rid of the opinion that environmental protection limits growth opportunities in the community. The presence of Kampinos NP helps keep the area attractive and creates favourable conditions for living there. It is essential to seek an optimum, i.e. balance between social, economic and environmental factors.
The key activities aiming at growing tourism taken up by local authorities within the last years include, among others, training for local population on tourist activities, promotional materials on tourist value of the region (leaflets, brochures, maps), opening and updating a website, erection of an observation tower, and support for pro-environmental initiatives, e.g. ecological education in schools.
The key form of cooperation and exchange of ideas and views on tourism between inhabitants and local authorities is the organisation of joint initiatives, while on a daily basis it is limited
mostly to contacts via village leaders, website, or publication of local periodicals.
According to the representatives of local authorities inhabitants want to live in Kampinos mostly because of sentimental attachment rather than economic reasons. An inflow of people from outside the district looking for better residential conditions and quality of life (woods, fresh air) can also be observed. Another phenomenon is the seasonal (mostly weekend) inflow of visitors, and consequently also the erection of the so-called second homes, most of which belong to people permanently residing in Warsaw.
According to local authorities difficulties and limitations experienced by inhabitants in relation to the fact that they live in the buffer zone of Kampinos NP or within its limits include: ban on mushrooming, no access to certain roads, damaged done by animals, limitations to building houses and to business activity.
The study also explored barriers to sustainable tourism in the Kampinos district and Kampinos NP perceived by local authorities. The interviewee pointed to major shortages in technical and tourist infrastructure as well as problems related communications, i.e. mostly the network of roads and their conditions. Another issue mentioned is low level of environmental awareness among inhabitants and no integration, self-organisation or motivation in the local community, also as regards initiatives and activities related to tourism and leisure. The key opportunities, at the same time, are believed to be related to very convenient location of the district in the vicinity of Kampinos NP and the Warsaw agglomeration, and by the main Warsaw-Poznań road which can be an advantage in the context of entrepreneurial initiatives.
Tourism in the eyes of the local community The most frequently mentioned benefits of living in Kampinos NP or in its buffer zone (table 1) include walks in the woods (90% positive mentions), and leisure activities in the open air (87%), followed by living in a quiet and calm area, far away from the hubbub and noise of a big city (80%). Hence, it can be observed that the local community threats Kampinos NP more like a regular municipal park or forest, i.e. a place that is appropriate for a walk. On the other hand, it is also considered a perfect place to live combining great
environmental value with immediate vicinity of a large urban agglomeration.
Table 1. The key benefits of living in Kampinos National Park or in its buffer zone
The benefits Absolutely no No Medium Yes Absolutely yes
n % n % n % n % n %
Fresh air, quiet place 0 0 1 0,9 21 19,0 33 29,7 56 50,4
Walking in the woods 0 0 4 3,6 7 6,3 42 37,8 58 52,3
Outdoor recreation 0 0 2 1,8 12 10,8 44 39,7 53 47,7
Picking mushrooms & forest fruits 8 7,4 13 12,3 29 27,4 29 27,4 27 25,5
Timber harvesting 21 21,2 25 25,2 23 23,3 22 22,2 8 8,1
Employment in KNP 27 31,0 45 51,7 9 10,4 5 5,7 1 1,2
Educational activity of Park 12 11,5 17 16,4 29 28,2 32 31,1 13 12,6
Activities for children 10 10,7 16 17,2 22 23,7 34 36,6 11 11,8
Source: Own study
Table 2. The weaknesses of living in Kampinos National Park and its buffer zone
The weaknesses Absolutely no No Medium Yes Absolutely
yes
n % n % n % n % n %
Limitations to the develop. of infrastr. 8 8,1 33 33,3 17 17,2 27 27,3 14 14,1
Limitations to agriculture 10 10,6 49 52,2 16 17,0 15 15,9 4 4,3
Limitations to business activity 9 9,4 41 43,2 17 17,9 17 17,9 11 11,6 Poor water & sewage infrastructure 9 8,7 41 39,8 19 18,5 22 21,4 12 11,6 Bad communication & public transport 7 6,5 16 14,9 23 21,5 29 27,2 32 29,9
Tourist traffic near the house 17 15,6 53 48,6 28 25,7 8 7,4 3 2,7
Ban on the use of some roads 10 9,5 41 39,1 27 25,7 23 21,9 4 3,8
Damage caused by animals 17 15,9 42 39,2 20 18,7 20 18,7 8 7,5
Ban on obtaining wood from the forest 14 15,9 38 43,2 20 22,7 11 12,5 5 5,7 Source: Own study
The key difficulties related to living in Kampinos NP or in its buffer zone included (table 2): poor transport conditions (57%) and limitations to building houses (41%), which in some cases do not allow for expanding existing buildings. What is also noteworthy is that those living in the Kampinos district do not believe living near or in the Kampinos NP to limit business activity (29%
of positive mentions) or to be related not to having access to some park roads (25.7%).
The study results also show that the respondents identify with their place of residence a lot (40.5%) or to some extent (36%). Another 17% claim to be very strongly attached to their place of residence, while 5.5% described their level of attachment as low. Only 1% admitted they did not identify with
the place they lived in at all. One has to bear in mind the fact that 68% of all the interviewees have been residing in Kampinos since they were born, which can explain such strong bonds to this area.
At the same time 51% of the respondents who have been living in the district since they were born do not plan to move outside the Kampinos NP area.
When describing their attitude to the environment of Kampinos NP, they stressed that it was a valuable heritage of the entire nation and that it should be protected because of that (93%), that it was of great environmental value (90%) and that it was an important place for recreation and leisure for the local community (81%).
As regards functions served by the Kampinos NP for the entire society and local communities
(figure 1) the respondents most often claimed that the Kampinos NP was the right place to rest (875%), an opportunity to protect the environment and keep its valuable objects (85%), and for clean environment (83%). Many respondents also claimed that the Kampinos NP it was an opportunity for promotion for districts within which it is located (84%). What is also noteworthy is that residents of the Kampinos district do not treat the Kampinos NP as a barrier that could hinder its development, make everyday life more difficult, or be something imposed by the state.
Figure 1. The respondents' opinions about the function of Kampinos National Park
Source: Own study
The survey results also show that the respondents believe tourism to be an important element of district development (41%). But the same proportion of the interviewees (41%) admitted that tourism had impact on the growth of their district, but was not the most important element. Tourism was perceived as the key growth factor by 8% of individuals surveyed, and a similar proportion (7%) believed it to have little impact on the development of their district. Only 3% claimed that tourism did not have any impact at all on the functioning and development of each district. At the same time, most inhabitants taking part in the study (55%) have friendly and positive approach to tourists who visit their towns and villages. Others described their attitude as neutral (39%) or difficult to define (6%). According to the respondents tourists coming to their place of residence did not cause major conflicts, and only some minor transgressions, such as leaving garbage on tourist
trails (74% of mentions), burning bonfires outside designated areas (41%) or entering private property (40%) could be observed.
Most respondents described the intensity of tourist traffic as medium (51%), 21% claimed it was low, and 13% said it was high. Other interviewees did not have an opinion. At the same time, over half of respondents (56%) were of the opinion that the number of tourists visiting their places of residence should be increased, whereas 41% would like their number to be kept at the current levels. Only 3% would like their number to decrease.
Possible initiatives that could according to the interviewees be taken up in order to attract a larger number of tourists and consequently increase tourist traffic in their towns and villages (figure 2) included first of all optimisation of the infrastructure (e.g. quality of roads, larger number of car parks, outlining trails, etc. - 86%), investments in tourist and recreation facilities (80%) and supporting local communities in growing their own business activities (82%). Many study participants also claimed that local authorities should support the community in growing their tourism-related business by organising training and workshops devoted to such topics (61% of mentions).
Figure 2. Potential actions of local authorities to increase the number of visitors
Source: Own study
The intensification of tourist traffic is believed by the respondents to have numerous potential benefits (table 3), e.g. higher profits for providers of services that will be used by tourists (87%), higher receipts for the local budget, and
consequently higher outlays in particular towns and villages, which is likely to improve standards and quality of life there (77%), improved
infrastructure in particular districts and better access to transport options (72%).
Table 3. The benefits from increased tourist traffic in Kampinos National Park and its buffer zone
The benefits from increased the number of tourists
Absolutely
no No Medium Yes Absolutely
yes
n % n % n % n % n %
New work places 4 3,8 6 5,7 28 26,8 45 42,8 22 20,9
Higher profits from service activities 0 0 2 1,8 12 11,0 70 64,3 25 22,9 Higher profits for the district budget 0 0 5 4,7 18 17,0 60 56,6 23 21,7
Improvement of infrastructure 1 0,9 3 2,8 17 16,3 62 59,1 22 20,9
Increase the number & availbility of services for
local population 0 0 6 5,7 23 21,9 56 53,4 20 19,0
Increase the number of entertainment 0 0 10 9,4 23 21,7 50 47,2 23 21,7
New & beneficial knowledge 1 0,9 4 3,7 23 21,4 59 54,6 21 19,4
Improving the residents' personal culture 6 5,7 10 9,5 32 30,5 42 40,0 15 14,3
Strengthening the local ties 2 1,9 16 15,1 30 28,3 44 41,5 14 13,2
Source: Own study based
According to the respondents local authorities should first of all monitor spatial and aesthetic order of particular locations, and to strive to obtain EU means for environmental protection and expansion of the tourist and leisure infrastructure (96% of mentions each). Fewer respondents pointed to the necessity to ensure proper tourist infrastructure for those who wish to involve in tourist business, as well as the expansion of this infrastructure (87% positive mentions each), followed by the need to ensure safety for both tourists and local inhabitants (85%).
The respondents were also asked to evaluate activities and achievements of their local authorities on a 5 point scale, where 5 was the highest and 0 the lowest score (table 4). The highest rated areas with relatively good scores included sport (the mean of 2.77) and education (2.72), followed by environmental protection (the mean of 2.46), order and safety (2.41) and culture (2.36). What is also noteworthy is that the respondents did not assess initiatives related to tourism and leisure too high (the mean of 2.05), which is prioritised in the district development strategy and which many goals and tasks that the district authorities involve in refer to.
Interviewees from the Kampinos district evaluated activities taken up by local authorities in
the area of transport and its accessibility the lowest (the mean of 1.43 only).
Table 4. Evaluate the performance and achievements of local authorities in selected fields
Achievements M SD
Education 2,72 1,02
Health care 2,17 1,06
Environmental protection 2,46 1,11
Culture 2,36 1,17
Sport 2,77 1,22
Tourism & leisure 2,05 1,23
Transport 1,43 1,20
Utilities & municipalities 2,06 1,27 Public order & safety 2,41 1,06
Source: Own study
Summary
The results of the research conducted among the local community of the Kampinos district and the analysis of initiatives taken up by local authorities in the area of tourism indicate that the situation in the Kampinos district seems to be tourism-oriented, which gives hope for proper development of sustainable tourism policy, but it still has to be
stressed that at the time being the potential of the district has not been fully leveraged.
The research results show that the key benefits for the Kampinos district inhabitants resulting from living in or near a national park include clean air, serenity, and ability to involve in tourism and recreation in the open air. The respondents are aware of how significant the location of their district within the Kampinos NP is. Nearly all of them agree that apart from offering great conditions for tourist and recreational activities, the Park also creates great opportunities for district promotion. Tourism is believed by inhabitants to be an important district growth driver, which can be confirmed by the fact that most of them hope that tourism will further expand and that the number of tourists who they have positive attitude to will increase. At the same time, they notice numerous benefits resulting from increasing the tourist traffic in their own district and in the Kampinos NP. But they also believe that local authorities should take up initiatives and activities aiming at supporting tourism expansion by improving tourist infrastructure, and supporting inhabitants in their business activities in this field.
It turned out that Kampinos has so far not benefited in any way from tourism in spite of prioritising it in its growth strategy. The district has planned certain investments that are to support the growth of farm tourism, catering and accommodation offer, and the development of the infrastructure in the form of tourist trails and tracks. Local communities are unable to invest in the infrastructure on their own, because of limited budgetary means, which is why they turn to private entrepreneurs, encouraging them to invest in tourism and in creating tourist products.
Taking this into account it can be said that it is possible to introduce the principles of sustainable tourism in the Kampinos district, it still requires numerous investments, but first of all cooperation between particular stakeholders. There are certain issues on the Kampinos NP – local authorities – local community line. But problems have always existed and always will. The current legal regulations prioritise the National Park as the highest form of environmental protection, but they do not have to lead to conflicts. The location of Kampinos district is very special, and Kampinos NP is a powerful factor driving its economic and social growth. It is necessary to keep the existing
resources in proper condition and to rationally manage the terrain, which is something that the principles of sustainable tourism are likely to support.
Acknowledgements
Research was conducted within the framework of the Statutory Activity (Youth Subsidy) of the Faculty of Tourism and Recreation at the University of Physical Education in Warsaw.
References
1. Brelik A. (2010). Zrównoważony rozwój społeczno-gospodarczy a rozwój agroturystyki.
Roczniki Ekonomiczne Kujawsko-Pomorskiej Szkoły Wyższej w Bydgoszczy, 3, 153.
2. Buckley R. (2009). Ecotourism. Principles &
practices. Wallingford: Cabi.
3. Kowalczyk A. (2010). Turystyka zrównoważona. Warszawa: PWN.
4. Niezgoda A. (2010). Społeczne uwarunkowania rozwoju turystyki zrównoważonej – przykład mieszkańców Poznania. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum. Ekonomia, 9, 259.
5. Parks for biodiversity – Policy guidance based on experience in ACP countries. 1999.
6. Strategia rozwoju gminy Kampinos do 2020 roku (2003). Kampinos: Urząd Gminy Kampinos.
7. Tymoftyjewicz T. (2010). Sprawozdanie z kadencji. Biuletyn Kampinoski, 4 (77), 8.
8. Zaręba D. (2010). Ekoturystyka. Warszawa:
PWN.
9. Zawilińska B. (2010). Możliwości rozwoju turystyki w parkach krajobrazowych Karpat Polskich w świetle idei zrównoważonego rozwoju. Kraków: Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny.
10. Zielony R. (2004). Lasy Kampinoskiego Parku Narodowego na przełomie XX i XXI wieku. In:
R. Andrzejewski (ed.). Kampinoski Park Narodowy. t. 2. Izabelin: Kampinoski Park Narodowy.
11. Żabińska T. (2000). Paradygmat turystyki zrównoważonej a problemy rozwoju turystyki na obszarach chronionych. In: S. Bosiacki (ed.), Gospodarka turystyczna u progu XXI wieku.
Poznań: Akademia Wychowania Fizycznego im. Eugeniusza Piaseckiego.
Małgorzata Gałązka galazkama@wp.pl