Environmental & Socio-economic Studies

DOI: 10.2478/environ-2019-0021
Environ. Socio.-econ. Stud., 2019, 7, 4: 26-35

© 2019 Copyright by University of Silesia in Katowice

______________________________________________________________________________________________
Original article

Evaluation of sustainable tourism potential of the principle Giant Mountains resorts in

the Czech Republic

Michaela Havlíková1*, Lucie Crespo Stupková2, Lenka Plíšková1

1Department of Economics, Faculty of Economics and Management, Czech University of Life Sciences, Kamýcká 129, 16521,
Prague, Czech Republic
2Cátedras CONACYT, Centre of Rural Studies, Michoacán’s College, Martínez de Navarrete 505, Las Fuentas, 59699 Zamora,

Mexico
E–mail address (*corresponding author): [email protected]
ORCID iD: Michaela Havlíková: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2694-3862; Lucie Crespo Stupková: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-
8126-8866
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A B S TR A C T
This paper proposes a new methodology for assessing the potential of sustainable tourism. It examines the overall potential
of the landscape when faced with the negative impacts of tourism. Our assessment combines components of tourism and
environmental sustainability. The methodology involved consultation with experts, and verification by tourists before
being applied to the study area. The methodology was then applied to selected tourism centres in the Giant Mountains. The
Giant Mountains are a popular tourist destination thanks to their outstanding natural beauty, and represent significant
potential for tourism development. They are also one of the most over-burdened regions from tourism in the Czech
Republic. However, many negative impacts of tourism exist, reducing the overall tourism potential of the region.
Comparative results from the individual tourist centres in the study reveal the significant impact of potentially reducing
attributes. Our assessment of the potential for sustainable tourism development in the area thus combines the
environmental aspect of sustainable forms of tourism, with the identification of the most serious threats that need to be
avoided to maintain the environment in the long-term. The results reveal the significant impact of excessive and
inappropriate infrastructure and housing, as well as insufficient environmental education and legislation.
KEY WORDS: tourism potential, sustainable tourism, potential assessment, the Giant Mountains
ARTICLE HISTORY: received 29 June 2019; received in revised form 28 October 2019; accepted 13 November 2019
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Introduction represents one of the few options for forming

the strong economic conditions that are required
According to the EUROPEAN COMMISSION (2007), to maintain populations in these areas and has
“sustainable tourism is tourism which is a direct impact on incomes and employment in
economically and socially viable without detracting the region. It brings additional finance into the
from the environment and local culture.” However, area, creates economies of scale; leads to
in areas heavily affected by mass tourism it is internationalization of business and improves
difficult to balance economic interests with social the transfer of knowledge. Conversely, there are
and environmental concerns. VYSTOUPIL ET AL. (2017) studies exposing the negative effects of tourism,
cite studies by PECHLANER & TSCHURTSCHENTHALER such as increased antagonism between tourists
(2003), SAARINEN (2003), WALL & MATHIESON (2006) and the local population, as well as their
and TELFER & SHARPLEY (2002) and provide several acculturation. Most recently ALVAREZ-SOUZA, 2017;
benefits of tourism for the development and FRANK, 2016; JOO ET AL., 2018). In addition,
economic prosperity of mountain areas. Tourism BIZZARRI (2016) and JAROS (2015) cite lower
26
public investment in infrastructure used by the constant pressure to increase accommodation
residents to service the tourist sector, and the capacity has led the Giant Mountains area to become
negative perceptions of protected areas by residents. a destination designed only for the needs of
This article introduces a methodology for tourists, with little consideration for the impact
assessing the potential for sustainable tourism this has had on the environment and the local
by measuring sustainable tourism activities. It also community. TRUHLIČKA (2007) and ŠTURSA (2011)
takes into consideration attributes which reduce believe that developmental activities undertaken
the sustainability of tourism. This methodology in the Giant Mountains show little empathy with
is then applied to our study area in Krkonoše, the surrounding landscape. Multi-storey buildings
Czech Republic. We chose the Giant Mountains are awkwardly juxtaposed with the character of
region (Krkonoše in Czech, Karkonosze in Polish) traditional mountain villages. These architectural
because this is one of the most visited national intrusions have transformed traditional rural
parks in the world thanks to its natural and mountain settlements into an urban form. The drive
landscape features. Yet at the same time, the to maximize financial returns on property built
Giant Mountains are among the most damaged on expensive land results in a reduction of greenery
protected area on earth (KLAPKA, 2008). and a disproportionate increase in accommodation
capacity.
1.1. Evidence of the burden of tourism in Krkonoše CHLAPEK ET AL. (2009) provide additional evidence
of the negative impact downhill skiing has had in
The Giant Mountains National Park (GMNAP) the Giant Mountains: the ski slopes significantly
receives between five and six million tourists scar the landscape; it causes soil erosion, degenerates
annually (one million more than Yellowstone the surrounding vegetation and forces changes
Park, in the United States in 2017). According to in the macroclimate. Most slopes cannot be used
data retrieved from 21 roadside scanners installed without artificial snow, placing additional pressure
at the entrance to zone one of the GMNAP, 1.41 on natural water resources. Night skiing threatens
million people entered this most strictly protected the health of many animal species, as artificial
area (Director of the GMNAP Administration Jan lighting can cause disruption to their communication,
Hřebačka cited by KUČERA (2017). POTOCKI (2010) feeding and reproductive patterns (BUJALSKÝ ET AL.,
examined the pressure on the natural environment 2014; ŠPATENKOVÁ, 1996). In the Giant Mountains,
in the large Giant Mountain resorts. He observed the negative effect of downhill skiing on the natural
that there was a huge imbalance between lettable environment is the most acute in the Czech
beds and full-time residents in the Giant Mountain Republic, since it has the largest concentration of
resorts. GMNAP has the highest number of lettable ski slopes (VYSTOUPIL & ŠAUER, 2011). Therefore,
beds and the densest bed capacity per square it is important to identify alternative activities
kilometre of all protected areas in the Czech which are sustainable whilst increasing the tourism
Republic. In Špindlerův Mlýn, tourists outnumber potential of the region.
residents by a ratio of five to one in the high
season (both winter and summer holidays). 1.2. Sustainable tourism
Exceeding this amount of tourism in the area has
negative impacts on the environment and on the The main academic disciplines that contribute to
local community. These effects are an increase in an understanding of tourism potential and
traffic and congestion problems, noise and air sustainability are economics, anthropology, sociology
pollution, higher water consumption (tourists and geography. Economics sees tourism as a
consume on average three to four times more water dynamic sector, possible sources of employment
than residents, ARLEM (2012), higher energy and income for the local population and a source
consumption (heating and air conditioning), higher of foreign currency reflected in the balance of
waste production, and results in the concreting payments. Anthropology and sociology reflect on
of wooded and fertile areas for car parks, an overall the socio-cultural and socio-economic aspects
rise of commodity prices within the resorts, and derived from tourism – interpersonal relationships
a singular focus on tourism as an economic between visitors and locals, distribution of power,
activity (to the detriment of other activities such customs, culture and their subsequent repercussions
as agriculture or forestry)(BIZZARRI, 2016). on the social fabric of the region and its
PÁSKOVÁ (2008) examines the damage caused organization. While geography has contributed
by the sub-standard construction of many houses, to: tourism planning, regionalization from a
cottages, apartments, guest houses and hotels. development approach and evaluation of the impacts
Business efforts to build additional ski slopes and of tourism on the landscape and natural environment
27
(CARDOSO, CASTILLO & HERNÁNDEZ, 2014). As the of local communities in his study about social
sustainable approach aims to offer holistic and entrepreneurship in one of Mexico’s most popular
long-term solutions to tourism development, it is destinations, the Tequila region (a designated
inevitable that a transdisciplinary approach is UNESCO World Heritage Site). He concluded that
adopted in order to maintain cultural integrity, the level of local poverty remained almost the
conservation of essential ecological processes, same. He attributes the causes of this to be the
biological diversity and local productive systems. sale of the main tequila companies to foreign
Ever since the publication in 1987 of the multinationals; an informal labor market, under
Brundtland report, technically known as “Our development of alternative economic activities; a
Common Future”, the sustainability principle has concentration of wealth among a few elite families,
been pursued. However, the concept is somewhat and high levels of insecurity. When addressing
contradictory: it looks to maintain economic sustainable tourism as an alternative for community
development, but without a) compromising the development ALCÍVAR & BRAVO (2017) stress that
resources (sometimes non-renewable), on which in today's world, where tourist populations are
the productive sector and local economy, depend constantly in search of culturally rich new
and b) without overloading the sociocultural destinations, communities must be empowered
capacity. Although in the current globalized era, with their cultural heritage.
tourism is a cultural representation derived from
the encounter between local peoples and tourists 1.3. Approaches to tourism potential
in one place (tourist destination), which in turn,
must meet the changing needs of liquid tourists1 Academics have been working on defining the
(CARDOSO, CASTILLO & HERNÁNDEZ, 2014). potential of tourism for many years, and their
A review of the existing literature provides approaches differ considerably. KRIPPENDORF (1980)
evidence of several approaches to sustainable sees tourism potential as a complexity of elements
tourism. A holistic approach is presented by to satisfy the needs of tourists. Especially in the
PAUNOVIC & JANOVIC (2017), who focused their 1990s, the term tourism potential was used
research on mountain tourism in the German Alps. extensively in the Economics and Geography sphere,
A managerial approach is offered by CORTE EL AL. without much consideration for its meaning or
(2014), who deal with issues surrounding purpose (IATU & BULAI, 2010). GLAVAN (1996)
destination management. However, most studies understands tourism potential as the assembly
adopt a strategic approach to their work. For of components (both material and non-material),
example, NOWACKI ET AL. (2018) evaluated scientifically recognized and practically proven,
tourism development strategies in Poland; TSAUR to provide the possibility of touristic capitalization
& WANG (2007) or COTTRELL & CUTUMISU (2006) and providing functionality for tourism. NESTOROSKA
each provide further examples of evaluations of (2012) on the other hand, provides a narrower
tourism strategies. Additional works using a strategic definition, limiting its scope to achieving
approach include CORTEZ (2010) and REICHEL & competitiveness in the tourism market. IATU &
URIELY (2003). Most recently, KISI (2019) presented BULAI (2010) see tourism potential as a qualitative
a hybrid strategic approach combining SWOT immaterial measure of certain subjective possibilities
and AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) Analyses. and conditions. MAMUN & MITRA (2012) agree that
SAIZ-ÁLVAREZ (2018) emphasized the importance the term tourism potential creates misunderstanding
and is often replaced by the term “attractiveness”.
MUNTELE & IATU (2003) also suggest “touristic
1BAUMAN (2013) uses the term “liquid” to describe a society offer” as a suitable synonym. We understand
where the actions of its members change before it is possible to
consolidated them into identifiable habits and routines. Liquid tourism potential to be: a summary of specific local
life sees the world as a collection of consumer objects, that lose socio-environmental components recognized not
their usefulness at the same time as being used. In practice, only by science, but also by the community, with an
anything that cannot prove its financial value is very precarious emphasis on the long-term functionality of tourism.
(BARRENO, 2011). ROJAS (1992) writes, in this sense, about the
light man, characterized by hedonism, enthronement of
Current research provides several approaches
pleasure, consumerism, accumulation of goods, permissiveness, on how to evaluate tourism potential. IATU &
and finally, relativism, where nothing is good or bad and BULAI (2010) discuss material and non-material
ultimately everything depends on the opinion of the individual approaches. They include natural resources, cultural
(cited in BARRENO, 2011). In this sense, a liquid tourist is a resources, tourism infrastructure and total
consumer of the landscape and biocultural heritage, for the
purpose of adventure and exceptional experience and its infrastructure in the tourism potential equation
subsequent presentation on social networks. and use multiple linear regressions to quantify
tourist arrivals. Another approach adopted by
28
researchers such as PRINSKIN (2001) and OPREA- 2. Methodology
GANCEVICI & CHEIA (2011), use a matrix form in
which each resource receives a score revealing The study area of the Giant Mountains includes
the importance of indicators. Other researchers the cadastral area of Harrachov, Rokytnice nad
have used Geographical Information Systems Jizerou, Špindlerův Mlýn, Pec pod Sněžkou and
(GIS) to assess tourism potential in their studies, Janské Lázně; and is connected by a mountain
including CHHETRI & ARROWSMITH (2008), TIMČÁK range encompassing a total area of 216.15 km2.
& VIZI (2006), KLISKEY (2000), MIKULEC & This area belongs to the tourist regions of
ANTOUŠKOVÁ (2010), NOVOTNÁ (2007) and RUDA Krkonoše and Podkrkonoší (Fig. 1) and has a
(2016). MAMUN & MITRA (2012) also point out population of approximately 27,000 residents.
that the multi-criteria decision-making technique The field research was conducted between 2013
has also been used and applied in numerous studies. and 2015.

Fig. 1. Location of the study area

(Author’s elaboration, based on ESRI base map. Vector data, park boundary, municipalities and georeferencing of images
from the web portal: https://geoportal.gov.cz/web/guest/map. Photos from: (1) – http://www.pardubicko.info/902_221199_
labska-stezka-od-pramenu-labe-do-narodniho-hrebcina-v-kladrubech/; (2) – http://www.czechtrack.cz/en/snezka-krkonose#.
WjfqeVWWYdU; (3) – http://www.ceske-sjezdovky.cz/stredisko/32_pec-pod-snezkou.html

The methodological approach was conducted activities applicable to the Giant Mountains. The
in several steps as demonstrated in Figure 2. The experts agreed on the following sustainable tourism
proposed methodology was then applied to the activities including landscape suitable for hiking
Giant Mountains region and the results were and mountain tourism, cycling, cross-country skiing,
compared. natural sightseeing, fauna and flora observation,
1) Interaction with experts. Fifteen experts2, were rural tourism, forest tourism, equestrian tourism,
interviewed in three rounds using the Delphi natural history exploration and geocaching.
method. This was to identify sustainable tourism Moreover, they were asked about attributes
reducing sustainability and they emphasized the
following: excessive & inappropriate infrastructure
2Experts from CzechTourism, Giant Mountain National Park, Czech
and housing, insufficient environmental education,
Union for Nature Conservation, Ministry of Regional Development
unprofessional destination management, and
and researchers from four Czech universities: Mendel
University in Brno, University of Hradec Králové, Polytechnic insufficient environmental & conservation legislation.
University of Jihlava and University of South Bohemia.
29
2) A questionnaire for tourists. In total, a respondents were chosen by simple random
sample of 150 tourists were asked to complete sampling.
a questionnaire regarding the attractiveness of 3) Determination of Points. The points on the Likert
the ten sustainable forms of tourism and the scale were translated and averaged, with the
four attributes reducing sustainability, as proposed highest rated activity having the greatest number of
by the experts. We used a Likert scale (1 – being points, and the attributes most reducing tourism
the most attractive, 5 - the least attractive). The sustainability, the most negative points (Figs. 3, 4).

Fig. 2. Scheme of the methodology, author’s own elaboration

Fig. 3. Attractiveness of the activities of sustainable tourism Fig. 4. Values of the degree of severity of attributes reducing
for visitors, author’s own elaboration the sustainability of tourism, author’s own elaboration

4) The scale of points used for evaluation of documents and databases: the Czech Statistical
tourism potential is expressed in Table 1, and was Office (CZSO), the Environmental Protection
determined according to BÍNA (2002) and PLŠKOVÁ Agency of the Czech Republic (AOPK CR), the
(2014). Only attributes of “fauna and flora” and National Heritage Institute (NPÚ) and the
“insufficient environmental education” are not National Information and Consulting Centre for
included because the distinction between the Culture (NIPOS). Furthermore, publications of
degrees of significance is not relevant (BÍNA, 2002). FLOUSEK & VANĚK (2012), VYSTOUPIL ET AL. (2008),
Points for evaluation of tourism potential were VYSTOUPIL & ŠAUER (2011), ŠTURSA (2011, 2012)
allocated to the categories according to the and data from the map of the Czech Tourist Club
following scale: the most significant (3), very (KČT, 2014) were referred to. Key documents for
significant (2), and significant (1). The first degree analysis of the characteristics reducing the
of significance (1) was derived from the average sustainability of tourism, included: a) mandatory
of the obtained points – totally 131 points (see disclosures (official decrees and regulations of
Fig. 3), and the two subsequent degrees being the municipality; resolutions of the municipal
multiples of this value (second degree – double: council - objections, intentions, demands, contracts
262 points, third degree – treble: 393 points). and tenders) b) territorial plans of individual
5) Evaluation of the potential for sustainable municipalities, c) data from tourist information
tourism in each resort. The evaluation concerning centre webpages, d) data from Czech Tourism
the potential of the region for sustainable tourism and e) Czech environmental and conservation
(Table 2) was done by analyzing the following legislation.
30
 Table 1. Proposed methodology (Author’s own elaboration)
Landscape suitability
1st degree 2nd degree 3th degree
for various activities
Natural sightseeing Significant landscape Significant and larger Nationally and internationally
elements, nature parks, natural attractions and important natural creations
NATURA 2000 protected protected areas of regional and specially protected areas
elements level (LPA)
Points 131 262 393
Hiking and mountain Slightly rugged hills and Landscape with higher Mountain and foothills with
tourism highlands with watercourses, altitude and relief, higher continuous forests, extensive
forests and agricultural proportion of forests, agricultural land-use, lookout
areas. Diverse terrain with meadows and pastures. Any points, hiking trails
tourist marked paths hiking trails
Points 116 232 348
Cycling Plains and hillsides in Plains, hillsides or open Mountain, foothills or high
agricultural areas without valley with a higher plateau with a larger share of
significant ecological damage; proportion of forests; forests; low population density
small proportion of forests, watercourses or ponds and distinctive landscape
compact settlements, aesthetics
suitable off-road routes
Points 87 174 261
Cross-country skiing Partly suitable terrain, Suitable terrain; long-lasting Ideal terrain in cold climatic
altitude approx. 500 m with snow cover and natural areas; long-lasting snow cover
suitable climatic conditions attraction and high natural attraction
Points 69 138 207
Rural tourism Rural landscape with medium Rural landscape with sparsely Mountainous landscapes
populated settlements in flat populated settlements in (or lower altitude landscape if
or slightly uneven terrain; more rugged terrain of exceptionally attractive) with
smaller proportion of forests, highland characteristics; sparsely populated
water areas and tourist higher proportion of forests, settlements; high proportion
marked paths water areas and tourist of forests, grasslands and
marked paths hiking opportunities
Points 101 202 303
Forest tourism Municipalities with 25 -50% Municipalities with 51 -75% Municipalities with ≥76%
forested area, with tourist forested area, with tourist forested area, with tourist
infrastructure infrastructure infrastructure
Points 107 214 321
Equestrian tourism Local horse riding paths and Regional horse riding paths International horse riding
circuits of several tens of with tens of kilometres paths with hundreds of
kilometres (secondary paths (regional paths) kilometres
from regional paths)
Points 77 154 231
Natural history Museums and exhibitions Museums and exhibitions Museums and exhibitions with
exploration with up to 10,000 visitors with 10,000 to 30,000 over 30,000 visitors per year
per year visitors per year
Points 66 132 198
Observation of fauna Existence of localities with occurrence of rare species or larger numbers of species of plants
and flora and animals
Points 276
Geocaching Dependent on the density of geocaches: regions with the highest density receive 3rd degree
of significance; lowest density regions receive zero points
Points 84 168 252
Attributes that reduce the sustainability of tourism
Excessive & New housing or infrastructure New housing or infrastructure New housing or infrastructure
inappropriate in environmentally sensitive in environmentally sensitive in protected areas, irretrievable
infrastructure and areas, without objections or protected areas where damage despite objections
housing objections (protests) were
recorded
Points -126 -252 -378
Unprofessional Municipalities under the Municipalities under the Municipalities that are not
destination auspices of destination auspices of destination under the auspices of
management management, participated management that did not destination management
in EDEN competition, but participate in any EDEN
did not reach final competition
Points -106 -212 -318

31
Insufficient Municipalities where Tourist Information Centres provided neither information nor
environmental activities relating to ecology
education
Points -306
Insufficient Developed legislation with Legislation with serious Non-existent environmental
environmental minor deficiencies deficiencies legislation
legislation
Points -100 -200 -300

Table 2. Resulting potential of the Giant Mountain region for sustainable tourism (Author’s own elaboration)
Špindlerův Pec pod Janské
Components Harrachov Rokytnice/Jizerou Ø
Mlýn Sněžkou Lázně
Natural
393 393 393 393 393 393
sightseeing
The territory of all monitored municipalities is partly located in the first zone of the GMNAP, in the Biosphere reserve
of the UN, forms part of NATURA 2000 and is on the list of important European ornithological territories
Landscape suitable for
348 348 348 348 348 348
hiking
The Giant Mountains have the highest density of tourist marked paths in the Czech Republic. The landscape is
mountainous and the population density is low (the highest density is in Rokytnice nad Jizerou, 75.5 inhabitants/km2)
Landscape suitable for
261 261 261 261 261 261
cycling
The territory is mountainous; with a larger share of forests; low population density and distinctive landscape
aesthetics, suitable off-road routes
Landscape suitable for
207 207 207 207 207 207
cross-country skiing
The territory is located on the border of two climatic areas - cold and very cold, it has long-lasting snow cover, the
terrain is suitable for cross-country skiing, and the landscape has outstanding natural beauty
LS for rural tourism 303 303 303 303 303 303
The Giant Mountains are a region whose land-use is divided into mountain, forest and agro-forestry. The monitored
municipalities have a share of permanent grassland from the agricultural land area of between 88% (in Rokytnice nad
Jizerou) and 99% (in Pec pod Sněžkou), high density of tourist marked paths, high share of forests and the low
population density (see above)
Landscape suitable for
321 214 321 321 321 300
forest tourism
This component is measured by the share of forests and the population density. The share of forests in the area of the
municipalities is high: between 85% - 91 %; except Rokytnice with 61% of forests. The population density is low
Landscape suitable for
0 0 0 0 154 31
equestrian tourism
Landscape suitability for equestrian tourism was demonstrated only at the Janské Lázně resort, through which passes
the 12km long trail known as “Beyond the Mountain Views”, which begins in the resort, and ends in Horní Albeřice
Landscape suitable for
natural history 66 0 0 0 0 14
exploration
Harrachov achieves a grade 1 rating in the landscape suitability for natural history exploration category because of
mining museum, which has a visitor rate of up to 10,000 people per year
Landscape suitable for
observation of fauna 276 276 276 276 276 276
and flora
There is a great diversity of plants and animals in the territory under consideration: there are at least 15,000 species
of invertebrates, 1 cyclostomata (Lampetra planeri), 5 native species of fish, 11 amphibians, 6 reptiles, 280 species of
birds, 76 species of mammals and approx. 1,200 species of flowering plants. A considerable number of species of fauna
and flora are considered to be nationally endangered
Landscape suitable for
252 252 252 252 252 252
geocaching
The Giant Mountains region belongs partly to Liberecký and partly to Hradec Králové regions, which are ranked
second and third in geocaching density (1.05 and 0.72 caches per km2) in the Czech Republic
Excessive infrastructure -378 -378 -378 -378 -378 -378
This component was measured by the number of objections and protests which have not been taken into
consideration by the local authorities. For example land annexation in naturally valuable localities and subsequent
threats to vegetation along the watercourse; risk of flooding; interference with species-rich meadows and forests;
extension of downhill skiing slopes in the first zone of GMNAP; the possibility of irreversible damage of
subterranial karst phenomena, and many others. These irregularities were observed in all resorts
Insufficient
environmental 0 -306 0 0 -306 -122
education
32
 Insufficient environmental education was found in both Rokytnice nad Jizerou and Janské Lázně, where Tourist
Information Centres provided neither information nor activities relating to ecology
Insufficient
-100 -100 -100 -100 -100 -100
environmental legislation
As a result of the accession of the Czech Republic to the European Union, the environmental legislation was transposed to an
almost developed one. Nevertheless, shortcomings in the Czech environmental legislation are caused mainly by too
rapid development. Analysis of the Czech environmental legislation was realized with help of experts from GMNP and
Czech Union for Nature
TOTAL 1,949 1,470 1,883 1,883 1,731 1,785

% of the total potential 69.9% 52.7% 67.5% 67.5% 62.0% 63.9%

3. Discussion and conclusions focus on factors reducing sustainability. The

most important is excessive and inappropriate
According to secondary data sources (point 5, infrastructure and housing. We propose that local
above), all Giant Mountain resorts attained the development plans and their updates should
highest number of points in the components of: be subjected to mandatory review by two
natural sightseeing, landscape suitability for hiking environmental experts. The resulting independent
and mountain tourism, landscape suitability for environmental impact assessments and conclusions
cycling, landscape suitability for forest tourism, must then be respected by local authorities and
landscape suitability for cross-country skiing, tourism management. Environmental legislation
landscape suitability for rural tourism, landscape and impact must be strictly adhered to in the case
suitability for observation of fauna and flora and of granting building permits or amendments and
landscape suitability for geocaching (Table 2). serious consideration should be given to the
The Giant Mountain resorts received an average objections and opinions of residents.
of 1,785 points. This represents a score of 64% of At present, the Ministry of the Environment is
the maximum possible attainable points (2,790). undertaking steps to integrate new European
Unprofessional destination management is not legislation on Environmental Impact Assessments
mentioned in Table 2 because it has not been (EIA) into Czech law. Such a move will undoubtedly
identified in any resort. All municipalities falling lead to an improvement in the hastily created Czech
under the auspices of destination management, environmental legislation.
participate in the EDEN3 competition and all have We state that the Giant Mountains region is one
previously been finalists in this competition. of the more saturated destinations in the Czech
The key feature of destinations selected for the Republic and its environmental and social capacity
EDEN competition is their commitment to the for facilitating tourism has become overstretched.
social, cultural and environmental sustainability This is in sharp contrast to the results of VYSTOUPIL
of tourism. This is therefore a credible form of ET AL. (2017), who conclude that, in most cases,
certification. the development of tourism in the Czech Republic
As mountain resorts have only a limited does not place excessive pressure on environmental
influence on the natural potential and landscape and socio-cultural aspects. They propose that
suitability for tourism activities, it is necessary to government investment should focus only on
selected locations with the highest potential for
tourism development. We are closer to the position
3In 2014, the European Commission published guidance that taken by YAN ET AL. (2017), who propose developing
assessing sustainable tourism potential should be the first
step in preparing tourism products, stressing the importance of regional tourist sites to attract new tourists
stakeholder groups in tourism and local development. seeking authentic heritage experiences. We stress
European Destinations of Excellence is an initiative promoting the necessity of ensuring that the limited financial
sustainable tourism development models across the EU. resources of municipal or provincial governments
The initiative is based on national competitions that take
place every other year and result in the selection of a
are allocated to the sites and activities that are
tourism 'destination of excellence' for each participating both sustainable and have relatively high tourist
country. Through the selection of destinations, EDEN effectively potential. Destination management should
achieves the objective of drawing attention to the values, distinguish the sustainable tourism activities and
diversity and common features of European tourist expand their offering, while non-sustainable tourism
destinations (EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2018).
activities should be suppressed. The sustainable
tourism activities should be both recommended
by experts and highly valued by tourists. The tourist

33
valuation plays a crucial role since tourists are Bauman Z. 2013. Vida líquida. Paidos.
the consumers of tourism activities. The proposed Bína J. 2002. Evaluation of tourism potential in the
municipalities of the Czech Republic – in Czech. Journal
methodology for assessing sustainable tourism Urbanismus a územní rozvoj, 5, 1: 2–11.
potential, with respect to the character of Bizzarri C. 2016. Opportunities and Costs of Tourism for a
mountainous areas, is systematic and could be new Humanism. Miscellanea Geographica, 20: 13–18.
reproduced in other mountain regions in the Czech Bujalský L., Březina S., Matějíček, L., Frouz, J. 2014. Light
pollution caused by artificial lighting of slopes in the
Republic. It has extended the current methodological Giant Mountains National Park – in Czech. Opera Corcontica,
approach (e.g. BÍNA, 2002, PÁSKOVÁ, 2008) by 51: 109–124.
incorporating attributes which reduce sustainability. Cardoso C., Castillo M., Hernández C. 2014. Sosteniendo al
We are, however, aware of a certain number turismo o turismo sostenible. Estudios y Perspectivas en
of shortcomings. The “environmental education” Turismo, 23, 2: 376–395.
Chhetri P., Arrowsmith C. 2008. GIS-based Modelling of
component should not only consider tourist Recreational Potential of Nature-Based Tourist Destinations.
education, but also education programmes for Tourism Geographies, 10, 2: 233–257.
residents of all age groups (e.g. campaigns for Corte V.D., Gaudio G.D., Iavazzi A. 2014. Managerial
children and students in school) as well as Approaches to Sustainable Tourism and Destination
Development. [in:] Proceedings of the International
education programmes for tourist operators. Conference on Tourism (ICOT 2013). Trends, Impacts
The “Excessive and inappropriate infrastructure and Policies on Sustainable Tourism Development.
and housing” component is measured only by Cyprus University of Technology, Editors: Konstantinos
their location and objections presented by residents. Andriotis: 147–159.
It should also consider the energy efficiency and Cortez S.L. 2010. Strategies for the Development of Sustainable
Tourism in the Amazon Rainforest of Bolivia. Worldwide
environmental impact of each new construction. Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 2, 136–143.
However, irrespective of its feasibility, this goes Cottrell S.P., Cutumisu N. 2006. Sustainable Tourism
beyond the scope of our current study. Development Strategy in WWFPan Parks: Case of a
The opinions of residents and local businesses, Swedish and Romanian National Park. Scand. Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism, 6: 150–167.
as the main stakeholders, should be taken into European Commission 2007. Agenda for a sustainable and
consideration. In our article we have suggested competitive European tourism, Brussels.
activities that increase the potential of sustainable European Commission 2014. Using Natural and Cultural
tourism and the opinions of local communities Heritage for the Development of Sustainable Tourism in
are considered only through content analysis of Non Traditional Tourism Destinations, Brussels.
European Commission 2018. EDEN – European Destinations
the municipal resolutions on objections, intentions, of Excellence, Brussels.
demands, contracts and tenders. The Czech legal Flousek J., Vaněk J. 2012. Fauna Krkonoš. Správa Krkonošského
system incorporates mechanisms to ensure local národního parku, Vrchlabí.
control over planned development projects and Frank S. 2016. Dwelling-in-motion: Indian Bollywood tourists
and their hosts in the Swiss Alps. Cultural Studies, 30, 3:
public contracts, but construction law is currently 506–531.
being reformed. This will make it easier for Glavan V. 1996. Tourist potential and its capitalization. Fundației
developers to build, while conversely making it România de Mâine, Bukurest [in Romanian].
harder for residents, or local civil associations, to Chlapek J., Hušek J., Jaskula F., Lehký J. 2009. Lyžování ve
control or resist their intentions. světle ochrany přírody. Ochrana přírody, 1: 22–24.
Iatu C., Bulai M. 2010. A critical analysis on the evaluation of
tourism attractiveness in Romania. Case study: the region
Acknowledgment of Moldavia. Proceedings of the 5th WSEAS International
Thanks to Mr. Jesus Medina Rodriguez from El Colegio de Conference on Economy and Management Transformation
Michoacán, Centro de Estudios de Geografía Humana for Timisiora (Romania). West University of Romania: 145–150.
graphical processing of the map. Jaros H. 2014. The public and economic aspects of the
functioning of protected areas within a commune.
Miscellanea Geographica, 19, 1: 24–28.
References Joo D., Tasci A., Woosnam K., Maruyama N., Hollas Ch.,
Aleshinloye K. 2018. Residents' attitude towards domestic
Alcívar I., Bravo O. 2017. Turismo sostenible: una alternativa tourists explained by contact, emotional solidarity and
de desarrollo comunitario desde un componente cultural. social distance. Tourism Management, 64: 245–257.
Espirales Revista Multidisciplinaria de investigación, 9: KČT/Club of Czech tourists 2014. Krkonoše, turistická mapa
31–44. 1:50 000. Praha: TRASA.
Alvarez-Sousa A. 2018. The Problems of Tourist Sustainability Kisi N. 2019. A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism
in Cultural Cities: Socio-Political Perceptions and Interests Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case
Management. Sustainability, 10: 503–516. Study of Zonguldak, Turkey. Sustainability, 11: 964.
Barreno C. 2011. Zygmunt Bauman y la sociedad líquida, Esfinge Klapka P. 2008. Krkonoše a udržitelný turismus. Krkonoše a
apuntes para un pensamiento diferente. Retrieved from Jizerské hory, 41, 3: 24–25.
https://www.revistaesfinge.com/filosofia/corrientes- Kliskey A.D. 2000. Recreation terrain suitability mapping: a
de-pensamiento/item/757-56zygmunt-bauman-y-la- spatially explicit methodology for determining recreation
sociedad-liquida [16.11.2019].

34
 potential for resource use assessment. Landscape and Reichel A., Uriely N. 2003. Sustainable Tourism Development
Urban Planning, 52, 1: 33–43. in the Israeli Negev Desert: An Integrative Approach.
Krippendorf J. 1980. Marketing im Fremdenverkehr. Verlag Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 21, 14–29.
Peter Lang, Bern and Frankfurt am Main. Ruda A. 2016. Exploring Tourism Possibilities Using GIS-
Kučera T. 2017. Krkonoše jsou podle sčítačů navštěvovanější Based Spatial Association Methods. Geophia Technica,
než americký Yellowstone, Statement of Jan Hřebačka, 11, 6: 87–101.
Director of the GMNAP Administration, Retrieved from Saarinen J. 2003. The Regional Economics of Tourism in
https://hradec.idnes.cz/navstevnost-krkonos-v-roce-2016- Northern Finland: The Socio-economic Implications of
dkq-/hradec-zpravy.aspx?c=A170221_2307294_hradec- Recent Tourism Development and Future Possibilities
zpravy_the [16.11.2019]. for Regional Development. Scandinavian Journal of
Mamun A.A., Mitra S. 2012. A Methodology for Assessing Hospitality and Tourism, 3, 2: 91–113.
Tourism Potential: Case Study Murshidabad District, West Saiz-Álvarez J. 2018. Turismo sostenible y emprendimiento
Bengal, India. International Journal of Scientific and Research social. El pueblo mágico de Tequila, México. Revista de
Publications, 2, 9: 1-8. Ciencias de la Administración y Economía, 5, 8: 51–67.
Mikulec J., Antoušková M. 2010. Use of GIS to analyse tourism Špatenková I. 1996. Sledování vlivu sjezdového lyžování na
burden – case study of protected landscape area Kokorinsko. vegetaci v subalpínském stupni Krkonoš. [in:] Monitoring,
[in:] UCLIO 2010: University conference in life sciences výzkum a management ekosystémů na území Krkonošského
– proceedings: 278–286. národního parku. Proceedings of the International Conference
Muntele I., Iațu C. 2003. Geography of tourism: concepts, held on the occasion of the 45th Anniversary of Opočno
methods and forms of spatio-temporal manifestation. Research Centers, VÚLHM, Opočno: 335–337.
Editura Sedcom Libris, Iași. [in Rumanien]. Štursa J. 2011. Velké kauzy: Labská a Luční bouda -
Nestoroska I. 2012. Identifying tourism potentials in Novodobé osudy bud na krkonošských hřebenech.
Republic of Macedonia through regional approach. Procedia Časopis Krkonoše – Jizerské hory, 5: 22–24 [in Czech].
– Social and Behavioral Sciences, 44: 95–103. Štursa J. 2012. Flora Krkonoš. Správa Krkonošského
Novotná M. 2007. Methodology of the evaluation of the národního parku, Vrchlabí.
geographic potential for tourism in the Plzeň region. Telfer D. 2002. Tourism and regional development issues.
Moravian Geographical Reports, 15, 2: 32–39. [in:] D. Telfer, R. Sharpley (eds.) Tourism and Development:
Nowacki M., Kowalczyk-Aniol J., Krolikowska K., Pstrocka- Concepts and Issues. Channel View, Toronto: 112–148.
Rak M., Awedyk M. 2018. Strategic Planning for Timčák G.M., Vizi L. 2006. Tourism potential mapping and a
Sustainable Tourism Development in Poland. International dedicated GIS. [in:] Trends, impacts and policies on
Journal of Sustainable Development World Ecology, 25, tourism development, International conference, Heraklion.
562–567. Truhlička I. 2007. Krkonoše: příroda, nebo obří sídliště?
Oprea-Gancevici D., Cheia G. 2011. Touristic potential, [Giant Mountains: Nature, or giant housing estate?] Retrieved
management and development in the Rarău Massif. from http://cestovani.idnes.cz/krkonose-priroda-nebo-
Journal of Tourism, 11: 76–85. obri-sidliste-d7f-/pocesku.aspx?c=A071104_130052_ig
Pásková M. 2008. Environmentalistika cestovního ruchu. igcechy_tom [16.11.2019].
Czech Journal of Tourism, 1, 2: 77–113. Tsaur S.H., Wang C.H. 2007. The Evaluation of Sustainable
Paunovic I., Jovanovic V. 2017. Implementation of Sustainable Tourism Development by Analytic Hierarchy Process
Tourism in the German Alps: A Case Study. Sustainability, and Fuzzy Set Theory: An Empirical Study on the Green
9, 226. Island in Taiwan. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research,
Pechlaner H., Tschurtschenthaler P. 2003. Tourism Policy, 12: 127–144.
Tourism Organisations and Change Management in Vystoupil J., Holešinská A., Kunc J., Šauer M. 2008.
Alpine Regions and Destinations: A European Perspective. Teoreticko-metodologické a praktické přístupy k
Current Issues in Tourism, 6, 6: 508–539. regionalizaci cestovního ruchu. Ekonomická revue
Plšková L. 2014. Hodnocení potenciálu řeky Orlice a okolí cestovného ruchu, 41, 2: 105–117.
pro udržitelný rozvoj cestovního ruchu. [in:] Dobrá Vystoupil J., Šauer M. 2011. Geografie cestovního ruchu
praxe a udržitelnost v cestovním ruchu. Univerzita České republiky. Aleš Čeněk, Plzeň.
Hradec Králové: 12–18. Vystoupil, J., Šauer M., Repik O. 2017. Quantitative Analysis
Potocki J. 2010. Pressure on natural environment in major of Tourism Potential in the Czech Republic. Acta
tourist locations of the Karkonosze Mts in light of Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae
demographic trends and expansion of the tourist function of Brunensis, 65, 3: 1085–1098.
the region. Opera Corcontica, 47: 277–282. Wall G., Mathieson A. 2006. Tourism: change, impacts, and
Prinskin J. 2001. Assessment of natural resources for opportunities. Pearson Education.
nature-based tourism: the case of the Central Coast Yan L., Bo W., Zang M. 2017. Mathematical model for
Region of Western Australia. Tourism Management, 22, 6: tourism potential assessment. Tourism Management, 63:
637–648. 355–365.

35