Page 97 - 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. 97
tourism in protected areas and the transformation of mljet island, croatia
Tab. 7 Indicators of social pressure of tourism on Mljet in the 1966–2016 period, by groups
of settlements
Tourism function index Tourism intensity
Year Mljet Mljet Coastal Interior Mljet Mljet Coastal Interior
National National
1966 81.7 0.0
1971 Park 134.4 Park 0.0
1976 221.4 3.3
1981 ---- 386.4 420.7 0.0 11.0
1986 793.3 0.0
1991 ---- 55.4 675.7 0.0 0.0
1996 274.4 0.0
2001 68.2 300.6 54.3 0.0 704.5 1,018.8 189.1 163.0
2006 1,323.8 251.5
2011 69.8 266.3 63.6 6.2 1,339.5 1,713.5 162.9 299.9
2016 2,370.2 259.6
89.7 322.0 71.3 0.0 3,422.9 241.5
35.2 123.9 0.0 0.0 218.6 0.0
60.4 212.0 0.0 0.0 964.2 0.0
113.4 212.9 51.9 82.6 2,073.2 147.2
147.4 246.8 228.3 39.0 3,464.0 1,000.0
138.5 223.7 171.9 51.6 3,176.9 1,122.8
212.3 298.3 285.9 64.4 4,794.6 2,844.3
Sources: FBS (1965; 1972); RBS (1967; 1972; 1977; 1982; 1983; 1987); CBS (1992; 1994; 1997;
2002; 2003; 2007b; 2012; 2013; 2017)
Rather high pressure of tourism in some small tourist resorts with
more complex accommodation structures (e.g. Mljet National Park) rep-
resented one of many reasons behind the tourism decline that followed.
Tourism in Croatia in the late 1980s suffered from various internal weak-
nesses and external factors, particularly shifting tourist preferences and
stronger competition from tourism destinations in other countries. On the
internal side, tourism arrivals and overnight stays exceeded the capacities
of local communities, infrastructure, and workforce in resorts, which start-
ed to cause negative effects in the summer season and damaged the tourism
experience. Therefore, after 1986, tourism entered a stage of decline (See:
Šulc, 2016; 2017); accompanied by the War, this prevented tourists from vis-
iting Croatia. Tourism intensity decreased more rapidly than the tourism
function index, indicating that accommodation capacities were still availa-
ble but visitors stopped coming.
Intensive recovery of tourism in the late 1990s again increased the
pressure on the island, accompanied by growing pressure on coastal and
95
Tab. 7 Indicators of social pressure of tourism on Mljet in the 1966–2016 period, by groups
of settlements
Tourism function index Tourism intensity
Year Mljet Mljet Coastal Interior Mljet Mljet Coastal Interior
National National
1966 81.7 0.0
1971 Park 134.4 Park 0.0
1976 221.4 3.3
1981 ---- 386.4 420.7 0.0 11.0
1986 793.3 0.0
1991 ---- 55.4 675.7 0.0 0.0
1996 274.4 0.0
2001 68.2 300.6 54.3 0.0 704.5 1,018.8 189.1 163.0
2006 1,323.8 251.5
2011 69.8 266.3 63.6 6.2 1,339.5 1,713.5 162.9 299.9
2016 2,370.2 259.6
89.7 322.0 71.3 0.0 3,422.9 241.5
35.2 123.9 0.0 0.0 218.6 0.0
60.4 212.0 0.0 0.0 964.2 0.0
113.4 212.9 51.9 82.6 2,073.2 147.2
147.4 246.8 228.3 39.0 3,464.0 1,000.0
138.5 223.7 171.9 51.6 3,176.9 1,122.8
212.3 298.3 285.9 64.4 4,794.6 2,844.3
Sources: FBS (1965; 1972); RBS (1967; 1972; 1977; 1982; 1983; 1987); CBS (1992; 1994; 1997;
2002; 2003; 2007b; 2012; 2013; 2017)
Rather high pressure of tourism in some small tourist resorts with
more complex accommodation structures (e.g. Mljet National Park) rep-
resented one of many reasons behind the tourism decline that followed.
Tourism in Croatia in the late 1980s suffered from various internal weak-
nesses and external factors, particularly shifting tourist preferences and
stronger competition from tourism destinations in other countries. On the
internal side, tourism arrivals and overnight stays exceeded the capacities
of local communities, infrastructure, and workforce in resorts, which start-
ed to cause negative effects in the summer season and damaged the tourism
experience. Therefore, after 1986, tourism entered a stage of decline (See:
Šulc, 2016; 2017); accompanied by the War, this prevented tourists from vis-
iting Croatia. Tourism intensity decreased more rapidly than the tourism
function index, indicating that accommodation capacities were still availa-
ble but visitors stopped coming.
Intensive recovery of tourism in the late 1990s again increased the
pressure on the island, accompanied by growing pressure on coastal and
95
