Visitor perception of recreational ecosystem services and their role in landscape management of Gölcük Nature Park, Turkey

References

• Albert C, Aronson J, Fürst C, Opdam P. 2014. Integrating ecosystem services in landscape planning: requirements, approaches, and impacts. Landscape Ecol. 29:1277–1285.
   Google Scholar
• Anonymous. 2019. Korunan Alanlar - Isparta. Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü; [accessed 2019 Feb 02]. http://ispartagolcuk.tabiat.gov.tr/
   Google Scholar
• Anonymus. 2017. Gölcük Tabiat Parkı Uzun Devreli Gelişim Plan Raporu. Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü. T. C Çevre ve Orman Bakanlığı Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara
   Google Scholar
• Antrop M. 2005. From holistic landscape synthesis to transdisciplinary landscape management. In: Tress B, Tress G, Fry G, Opdam P, editors. Landscape research to landscape planning: aspects of integration, education and application. Heidelberg: Springer; p. 27–50.Wageningen UR Frontis Series No. 12
   Google Scholar
• Arslan Muhacir ES, Tazebay İ. 2017. A tool in determination of rural tourism alternatives: the ecosystem services approach. Turk J Agric For. 18(1):74–81.
   Google Scholar
• Atmiş E. 2018. A critical review of the (potentially) negative impacts of current protected area policies on the nature conservation of forests in Turkey. Land Use Policy. 70:675–684.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell S. 2008. Design for outdoor recreation. London: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Bell S, Tyrväinen L, Sievänen T, Pröbstl U, Simpson M. 2007. Outdoor recreation and nature tourism: A European perspective. Living Rev Landscape Res. 1(2):1–46.
   Google Scholar
• Casado-Arzuaga I, Onaindia M, Madariaga I, Verburg PH. 2014. Mapping recreation and aesthetic value of ecosystems in the Bilbao Metropolitan Greenbelt (Northern Spain) to support landscape planning. Landsc Ecol. 29(8):1393–1405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Council of Europe 2000. European landscape convention. European Treaty Series, No:176. [accessed 2019 Dec 23]. https://rm.coe.int/1680080621
   Google Scholar
• Çokçalışkan AB, Bakır B, Babak A, Karadeniz N. 2014. Ecosystem services at forest landscapes in Turkey and their management. In: Alphan, H., Atik, M., Baylan, E., Karadeniz, N. editor. Proceedings of the International Congress on Landscape Ecology, 23–25 October 2014, Antalya, Turkey: PAD Publications No:2.
   Google Scholar
• Daniel TC, Muhar A, Arnberger A, Aznar O, Boyd JW, Chan KM, Costanza R, Elmqvist T, Flint CG, Gobster PH. 2012. Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 109(23):8812–8819.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dong R, Liu X, Liu M, Feng Q, Su X, Wu G. 2016. Landsenses ecological planning for the Xianghe segment of China’s grand canal. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol. 23(4):298–304.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2011. EU 2020 Biodiversity Strategy; [accessed 2019 Feb 05]. https://www.eea.europa.eu/policy-documents/eu-2020-biodiversity-strategy
   Google Scholar
• Fakir H 1998. Research on the flora of Isparta Golcuk lake district [MSc thesis]. Isparta: Suleyman Demirel University.[in Turkish].
   Google Scholar
• Gosal AS, Newton AC, Gillingham PK. 2018. Comparison of methods for a landscape-scale assessment of the cultural ecosystem services associated with different habitats. Int J Biodivers Sci Ecosyst Serv Manag. 14(1):91–104.
   Google Scholar
• Grahn P, Stigsdotter UA. 2003. Landscape planning and stress. Urban For Urban Green. 2(1):1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Gül A, Örücü ÖK, Karaca Ö. 2006. An approach for recreation suitability analysis to recreation planning in Gölcük Nature Park. Environ Manage. 37(5):606–625.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hermes J, Van Berkel D, Burkhard B, Plieninger T, Fagerholm N, von Haaren C, Albert C. 2018. Assessment and valuation of recreational ecosystem services of landscapes. Ecosyst Serv. 31:289–295.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernández-Morcillo M, Plieninger T, Bieling C. 2013. An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators. Ecol Indic. 29:434–444.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karatepe Y, Süel H, Yetüt İ. 2005. An ecological examination of growth 0f taurus Cedar (Cedrus Libani A. Rich.) On soils developed from different parent materials in Isparta Golcuk National Park. Turk J Agric For. 1:64–75.
   Google Scholar
• Kulczyk S, Woźniak E, Derek M. 2018. Landscape, facilities and visitors: an integrated model of recreational ecosystem services. Ecosyst Serv. 31:491–501.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kurdoğlu O, Çokçaliskan BA. 2011. Assessing the effectiveness of protected area management in the Turkish Caucasus. Afr J Biotechnol. 10(75):17208–17222.
   Google Scholar
• Kuvan Y, Erol SY, Şahin G. 2018. Management of forest areas used for ecotourism and recreation in Turkey. FORESTIST. 68(2):114–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• La Rosa D, Spyra M, Inostroza L. 2016. Indicators of cultural ecosystem services for urban planning: a review. Ecol Indic. 61:74–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee AC, Maheswaran R. 2011. The health benefits of urban green spaces: a review of the evidence. J Public Health (Bangkok). 33(2):212–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MA. 2005. MillenniumEcosystemAssessment. Washington (DC):WorldResourcesInstitute.
   Google Scholar
• Özgüner H. 2011. Cultural differences in attitudes towards urban parks and green spaces. Landscape Res. 36(5):599–620.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maes J, Egoh B, Willemen L, Liquete C, Vihervaara P, Schägner JP, Grizzetti B, Drakou EG, La Notte A, Zulian G. 2012. Mapping ecosystem services for policy support and decision making in the European Union. Ecosyst Serv. 1(1):31–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maller C, Townsend M, St Leger L, Henderson-Wilson C, Pryor A, Prosser L, Moore M. 2009. Healthy parks, healthy people: The health benefits of contact with nature in a park context. JSTOR. 26(2):51–83.
   Google Scholar
• Monz CA, Cole DN, Leung Y-F, Marion JL. 2010. Sustaining visitor use in protected areas: future opportunities in recreation ecology research based on the USA experience. Environ Manage. 45(3):551–562.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore RL, Driver BL. 2005. Introduction to outdoor recreation: providing and managing natural resource based opportunities. State College: Venture Publishing, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Palmer J. 1967. Recreational planning—a bibliographical review: this review has been based on a collection compiled with the aid of a grant provided by the City and County of Newcastle upon Tyne. Plann Outlook. 2(1–2):19–69.
   Google Scholar
• Paracchini ML, Zulian G, Kopperoinen L, Maes J, Schägner JP, Termansen M, Zandersen M, Perez-Soba M, Scholefield PA, Bidoglio G. 2014. Mapping cultural ecosystem services: A framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across the EU. Ecol Indic. 45:371–385.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickering C, Rossi SD, Hernando A, Barros A. 2018. Current knowledge and future research directions for the monitoring and management of visitors in recreational and protected areas. J Outdoor Recreation Tourism. 21:10–18.
   Google Scholar
• Porteous JD. 1996. Environmental aesthetics: ideas, politics and planning. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Republic of Turkey Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. 2018. Nature park's database; [accessed 2019 Jan 12]. https://www.tarimorman.gov.tr/Sayfalar/EN/AnaSayfa.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Sasidharan V. 2002. Special issue introduction: understanding recreation and the environment within the context of culture. Leisure Sci. 24(1):1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaich H, Bieling C, Plieninger T. 2010. Linking ecosystem services with cultural landscape research. Gaia-Ecological Perspect Sci Soc. 19(4):269–277.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schirpke U, Scolozzi R, Da Re R, Masiero M, Pellegrino D, Marino D. 2018. Recreational ecosystem services in protected areas: A survey of visitors to natura 2000 sites in Italy. J Outdoor Recreation Tourism. 21:39–50.
   Google Scholar
• Shivers JS. 1967. Principles and practices of recreational service. USA: The Macmillan Co.
   Google Scholar
• Shivers JS, Hjelte G. 1973. Planning recreational places. 2 nd. USA:  Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stålhammar S, Pedersen E. 2017. Recreational cultural ecosystem services: how do people describe the value? Ecosyst Serv. 26:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stigsdotter UA, Grahn P. 2004. A garden at your workplace may reduce stress. In: Dilani A Editor. Design and health III – health Promotion through environmental design research Centre for Design and health, Stockholm. 147–157
   Google Scholar
• Tacey DJ. 2000. Reenchantment: the new Australian spirituality. USA: Harper Collins Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Tezer A, Turkay Z, Uzun O, Terzi F, Koylu P, Karacor E, Okay N, Kaya M. 2018. Ecosystem services-based multi-criteria assessment for ecologically sensitive watershed management. Environ Dev Sustainability. Online First Article:1–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The World Bank. 2019. Summary of the total income in Turkey; [accessed 2019 Feb 02]. https://data.worldbank.org/country/turkey
   Google Scholar
• Tuan YF. 1977. Space and place. Minneapolis (USA): University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turton SM. 2005. Managing environmental impacts of recreation and tourism in rainforests of the wet tropics of Queensland World Heritage Area. Geog Res. 43(2):140–151.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• UNEP. 2011. Aichi Biodiversity Targets Strategic Goals; [accessed 2019 Apr 05]. https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/11106/swio_wg1_pre%20%285%29.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
   Google Scholar
• Weyland F, Laterra P. 2014. Recreation potential assessment at large spatial scales: A method based in the ecosystem services approach and landscape metrics. Ecol Indic. 39:34–43.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WHO. 2016. Global report on urban health. [accessed 2019 Feb 02]. http://www.who.int/kobe_centre/publications/urban-global-report/en/. Switzerland: WHO Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zhao J, Liu X, Dong R, Shao G. 2016. Landsenses ecology and ecological planning toward sustainable development. Int J Sustainable Dev World Ecol. 23(4):293–297.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar