Page 23 - Koderman, Miha, and Vuk Tvrtko Opačić. Eds. 2020. Challenges of tourism development in protected areas of Croatia and Slovenia. Koper, Zagreb: University of Primorska Press, Croatian Geographical Society
P. 23
explanatory notes on tourism in protected areas of croatia and slovenia

of Slovenia, which is why they became important primarily as leisure areas
and secondarily as tourism areas. With the goal of confirming possibilities
for the development of nature-based tourism in rural areas of Kraški Rob,
the sixth chapter of this book contains a scored assessment of the attrac-
tiveness of natural attractions and their tourism accessibility.

The seventh chapter of the book deals with second homes, as a form of
recreation and potentially also of tourism in protected areas (Natura 2000).
The described phenomenon is presented using the example of the village
Sviščaki in forested area around Snežnik Mountain—the highest mountain
in Slovenia that is outside of the Alps. Regarding the example of Škocjanski
zatok Nature Reserve, the eighth chapter of the book shows the transfor-
mation of a once-degraded area in the vicinity of the port city Koper, which
has become a protected marsh area with educational and tourism/recrea-
tional functions, due to the process of renaturalisation.

The last three chapters are dedicated to the planning of tourism and
management in protected areas from the aspect of tourism in both states.
The ninth chapter tackles spatial planning in tourism in protected are-
as in Slovenia, and primarily gives an overview of planning on different
levels (national to local), before examining them using the examples of
Škocjanski zatok Nature Reserve, Lipica (Natura 2000), and Škocjan Caves
Regional Park. The tenth chapter discusses the interrelation between devel-
opment, management, and management issues in Plitvice Lakes National
Park—the most visited protected area in Croatia. In this chapter, phases of
tourism development according to Butler’s model (TALC) and the related
management phases and approaches are presented.

The last chapter synthesises the main findings of the research present-
ed in the previous chapters and integrates these findings into recommen-
dations for future management of protected areas, in keeping with the con-
cept of sustainable tourism.

Conclusion

It can be concluded that protected areas differ in intended purpose, in re-
lation to both IUCN categorisation and categorisation in Croatia and
Slovenia. One of the main differences between the Croatian and Slovenian
systems of protected areas is that there are more types of protected areas in
Croatia (9 in total) than in Slovenia (6 in total). In Croatia, there is a high-
er number of “large” protected areas (national parks, nature parks), while

21
   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28