Page 232 - 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. 232
challenges of tourism development in protected areas of croatia and slovenia
ing how successful said goals were during the period that they were active-
ly pursued (Tab. 2). Apart from scores, the respondents also shared their
thoughts on individual goals and in regard to the advantages and disadvan-
tages of the existing management model.
Accordingly, the respondents found that the majority of the goals were
insufficiently-relevant and unfulfilled, which is exceptionally important in
terms of efficiency of management. Of the 14 goals, six were deemed irrel-
evant, unnecessary to have as a general goal, or as goals that the manage-
ment body can and/or should direct resources to achieve, four were deemed
partially-relevant, and the remaining four were deemed relevant in relation
to the management problems faced by the Park. Furthermore, in terms of
the successful achievement of management goals, a high level of inefficien-
cy in management was indicated, such that only one goal was completely
achieved, while five were partially-achieved, and the remaining eight goals
were not achieved, in the opinion of the respondents.
As the new management plan for the period of 2019 to 2028 has yet to
be formally adopted at the time of writing, the respondents were not able to
assess it as they had the previous plans, rather they examined the relevance
of the new goals and themes and how they related to the goals of previous
management plans (Tab. 3).
Tab. 2 Scores of relevance and successful achievement of management goals (R-relevance,
P-level of successful achievement)9 in Management Plan for Plitvice Lakes National Park,
2007
Management Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon-
goal dent 1 dent 2 dent 3 dent 4 dent 5 dent 6 dent 7 dent 8
RPRPRPRPRPRPRPRP
Forest ecosys-
tems 333-133333233332
Tufa barriers 3 1 3 2 3 1 3 1 2 1 3 2 3 1 2 2
and formations
Grassland pres- 2 2 3 - 2 - 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 - 3 -
ervation
Presentation of 3 1 3 2 2 1 2 2 3 - 3 1 3 1 3 2
the rural area
9 Relevance: 1) the goal is irrelevant; 2) the goal is partially-relevant; 3) the goal is rel-
evant; Level of successful achievement: 1) the goal was not achieved; 2) the goal was
partially-achieved; 3) the goal was achieved.
230
ing how successful said goals were during the period that they were active-
ly pursued (Tab. 2). Apart from scores, the respondents also shared their
thoughts on individual goals and in regard to the advantages and disadvan-
tages of the existing management model.
Accordingly, the respondents found that the majority of the goals were
insufficiently-relevant and unfulfilled, which is exceptionally important in
terms of efficiency of management. Of the 14 goals, six were deemed irrel-
evant, unnecessary to have as a general goal, or as goals that the manage-
ment body can and/or should direct resources to achieve, four were deemed
partially-relevant, and the remaining four were deemed relevant in relation
to the management problems faced by the Park. Furthermore, in terms of
the successful achievement of management goals, a high level of inefficien-
cy in management was indicated, such that only one goal was completely
achieved, while five were partially-achieved, and the remaining eight goals
were not achieved, in the opinion of the respondents.
As the new management plan for the period of 2019 to 2028 has yet to
be formally adopted at the time of writing, the respondents were not able to
assess it as they had the previous plans, rather they examined the relevance
of the new goals and themes and how they related to the goals of previous
management plans (Tab. 3).
Tab. 2 Scores of relevance and successful achievement of management goals (R-relevance,
P-level of successful achievement)9 in Management Plan for Plitvice Lakes National Park,
2007
Management Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon- Respon-
goal dent 1 dent 2 dent 3 dent 4 dent 5 dent 6 dent 7 dent 8
RPRPRPRPRPRPRPRP
Forest ecosys-
tems 333-133333233332
Tufa barriers 3 1 3 2 3 1 3 1 2 1 3 2 3 1 2 2
and formations
Grassland pres- 2 2 3 - 2 - 3 3 2 3 2 2 3 - 3 -
ervation
Presentation of 3 1 3 2 2 1 2 2 3 - 3 1 3 1 3 2
the rural area
9 Relevance: 1) the goal is irrelevant; 2) the goal is partially-relevant; 3) the goal is rel-
evant; Level of successful achievement: 1) the goal was not achieved; 2) the goal was
partially-achieved; 3) the goal was achieved.
230
