CC BY
8
Научная статья УДК 338.48
DOI 10.18101/2304-4446-2022-1-58-69
COMPONENTIAL AND INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT OF THE POTENTIAL OF MONGOLIC NATIONAL CULTURAL TOURISM RESOURCES
© Peng Ling
A/Prof.,
Xian Jiaotong University
28 Xianning West Road, Xian 710049, China
peng_ling2002@126.com
© Ayana B. Yangutova
Institute of Geography, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 11a Datun Road, Beijing, Chaoyang District, China mishayang999@mail.ru
Abstract. The article proposes a methodology for component-by-component and integral assessment of the potential of Mongolian national cultural tourism resources. The integrated indicator for a region's cognitive potential has been calculated across the following three components: natural, cultural-historical, and socio-economic. Each of these components incorporates several subgroups with their own factors and different units of measurement. Each of the parameters making up the natural component deals with tourist interest in a particular area. The cultural-historical component is linked directly with one's interest in cultural tourism. The socio-economic component is associated with the development of appropriate infrastructural conditions for realizing the potential of cultural tourism. The proposed methodology is based on open data monitored by state statistics authorities and includes 23 different parameters reduced to a single integral indicator. This makes it possible to rank the areas densely inhabited by the Mongolic people across a multitude of factors governing the potential of national cultural tourism resources. The proposed model has been verified using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient.
Keywords: potential of Mongolian national resources, cultural tourism, spatial distribution of tourism potential, common ethno-cultural space of the Mongolic peoples.
For citation
Peng Ling, Yangutova A. B. Componential and Integrated Assessment of the Potential of Mongolic National Cultural Tourism Resources. Bulletin of Buryat State University. Economy and Management. 2022; 1: 58-69.
1. Introduction
The potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources is a special geographical category of a systemic nature. It may be viewed as a collection of complex organized phenomena whose interaction enables an area to engage in tourism activity. A key feature of an area's potential is that the total productivity of the resources that make up the potential is not equal to the sum of their individual productivities [4, 5]. Consequently, an area's potential has relatively high levels of cost efficiency and resistance to the effects of the outside environment [2]. The potential of Mongolic national resources is full of promise. The use of a combination of relevant quantitative
and qualitative characteristics will help to assess it in as comprehensive a manner as possible.
Assessing the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources is an important basis for optimizing and rationalizing the spatial and economic organization of territorial tourism systems, determining the value of particular resources and combinations of them, establishing spatial differences in resource accessibility, and developing ways for ensuring rational resource use and balanced development in the area. Despite the fact that this line of research has been continually explored by researchers, the use of the assessment approach is currently still limited due to insufficient insight into many of its theoretical and methodological aspects [3. 8].
Conducting a geographical assessment of the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in the areas involves a set of procedures aimed at determining their relative value (relative to each "standard" or to each other) with a view to helping to organize and conduct tourism activity.
2. Materials and Methods
An analysis of existing research on the topic suggests that the process of assessing the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in the regions may be split into the following consecutive stages:
1. Selection of territorial units around which to perform calculations
At this stage, it is most important to divide the region under examination judiciously into several territorial units, which will depend on both the study's objectives and the region's distinctive characteristics. The choice of network of territorial units for the assessment has a direct effect on the quality of the assessment's outcomes. For instance, in Russia in 56% of cases they use administrative-territorial units to assess a region's tourism potential, 16% - natural-territorial complexes, and 12% - specially distributed regular territorial cells.
Each type of territorial units comes with its upsides and downsides, so the choice thereof varies from study to study. The choice of the administrative-territorial division as a territorial unit is associated with the ease of collecting information [7].
A major factor for choosing large areas as territorial units for the study is the availability of reliable statistics on the topic in each of the countries (Russia, Mongolia, and China), as there is little to no statistics available on certain localities in them [6]. A key difficulty may lie in comparing data on the regions in Russia and China (Ethnic Burya-tia, the Republic of Kalmykia, and the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region) with data on Mongolia [1].
Evidence from experience suggests that the use of administrative-territorial units as the standard for the study tends to be the way to go in this particular context given the upsides and downsides of the approaches examined above.
2. Selection of a subject around which to assess the territorial units
The next crucial step in assessing the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in the areas involves selecting a subject around which to assess them. This is followed by selecting a set of closely interrelated assessment criteria. The subject in this study is the abstract average tourist, i.e. there will be a generalized assessment of an area's potential (i.e., regardless of the tourist's gender, ethnicity, age, etc.).
3. Establishment of a set of assessment criteria
As mentioned earlier, the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in the areas implies not only the entire set of tourism resources in them but special tourism-related conditions as well, on which it is necessary to gather some additional information. For each section, the study will employ sets of absolute (primary) and relative (secondary) indicators, which will be computed, processed, and recorded into the GIS. The use of a two-tier indicator system is methodologically desirable, as relative indicators can serve to illuminate the distribution of particular factors taking into account the area of the region under assessment.
The study employed a total of 23 indicators (Table 1), which were grouped into the following three blocks: 1) natural - eight indicators (e.g., climate, hydrology, etc.); 2) cultural-historical - six indicators, utilized for simple arithmetical calculations (e.g., significant historical and architectural sites, cultural and national heritage sites, etc.); 3) socio-economic - nine indicators (e.g., accommodation establishments, public catering facilities, transportation infrastructure, etc.).
Table 1
System ofIndicators for Integrated Assessment of the Potential of Mongolic National Cultural Tourism Resources in the Areas, Supplemented with Weighting Coefficients
Component Groups Indicators
Natural Climate Average summer temperature, °C
Number of days without permanent snow cover
Hydrology Total length of the river network, km
Combined area of the lake systems, km2
Number of mineral water springs and springs for mud baths
Flora Total area under forests, km2
Special protection natural areas Number of nature sanctuaries
Total area under special protection natural areas, km2
Cultural-historical Historical monuments Number of significant archeological sites
Number of significant historical sites
Cultural heritage sites Number of significant architectural sites
Number of cultural leisure sites (museums, theaters, concert halls, cultural centers, permanent exhibitions, and galleries)
Number sites of traditional culture (ethnographical centers)
Sites of cult Number of monasteries
Socio-economic Outdoor activities sites Number of sporting venues and facilities
Health improvement facilities Number of health resorts, specialized medical centers, etc.
Public catering facilities Number of public catering facilities
Accommodation establishments Number of hotels, hostels, etc.
Transportation infrastructure Paved roads, km
Federal highways, km
Railroads, km
Number of bus and railroad depots, wharfs, seaports, and river ports
Tourist information facilities Number of tourism agencies
The integrated indicator for a region's cognitive potential will be calculated across the following three components: natural, cultural-historical, and socio-economic. Each of these components incorporates several subgroups with their own factors and different units of measurement. Each of the subgroups, in turn, describes the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in its own way.
The natural component includes the following groups of parameters: climate, hydrology, flora, and special protection natural areas. Each of the parameters making up the natural component deals with tourist interest in a particular area. For instance, the overwhelming majority of tourists prefer visiting places that are mild in climate and rich in flora and fauna. There is even more attractiveness in places that have been kept intact from human interference.
The cultural-historical component is linked directly with one's interest in cultural tourism. Numerous and diverse archaeological, architectural, and cultural heritage sites can be a potent attraction for tourists. Another major area is cultural leisure facilities, including museums, theaters, concert halls, cultural centers, galleries, and permanent exhibitions. A significant area is sites of cult, monasteries, and other religious places.
The socio-economic component is linked with ensuring appropriate infrastructural conditions for realizing the potential of cultural tourism. It incorporates the following groups of factors: outdoor activities sites, health improvement facilities, public catering facilities, and accommodation establishments, as well as transportation infrastructure and tourist information facilities. These factors determine the provision of comfort and security to visitors to the area.
The use of the above three components helps to rank the areas densely inhabited by Mongolic people across a multitude of factors governing the potential of national cultural tourism resources.
4. Calculation of componential indicators
The units of measurement used for the selected factors and the corresponding indicators are different, so they cannot be integrated with each other to form a single indicator. Before building an integrated indicator reflecting the potential of the Mongolic national cultural tourism resources, the set of input indicators needs to be brought to a 'common denominator'. In other words, we need to make use of a certain conversion algorithm that will enable measurements on a single N-dimensional scale.
To this end, we identify the region with the greatest indicator value for all the comparison criteria selected, and then take this value as the basis and compare it against
100%. In the next step, recalculations are performed for the indicators of the other regions versus the base values presented as a percentage. The following formula is used:
Si = —100%
•max
where i is the region number,
Xi is the value of the parameter observed in the i-th region,
Xmax is the highest observed value of the base region's parameter taken as 100%;
Si is the percentage showing ratio of the parameter in the i-th region versus the base region.
The result of this recalculation is a data set with parameters that correspond to the base of the leader region.
Then, the relative parameters are added up to form the final assessment value that represents the potential of cognitive interactions. This gives a ranked list of knowledge economy in RF entities. Identical weight ratios of each indicator are a key assumption in this exercise.
The above-described method can be used to perform a step-by-step assessment of natural environment and resources, history and culture resources, and socio-economic parameters upon componential assessment of the potential behind the Mongolic cultural tourism national resources.
5. Final assessment calculation
We use the arithmetic mean formula to calculate the integrated potential of the Mongolic national cultural tourism resources.
P _ 51+52+53+-----+523
23 ,
where P is the integrated assessment value of the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in a particular area, and
Si is the percentage correlation between the assessment parameter of the Mongolic national cultural tourism resources potential for the set of all the components under review.
Hence, the assessment value of the resources potential for the four regions densely inhabited by Mongolic people lies within the 0 to 100 range.
The resulting value of the cultural tourism resources potential enables building a ranking list of the regions under review. In other words, the greater the R value, the higher is the region on the ranking list. The purpose of the ranking is to put the study subject in a certain order for subsequent comparative analysis. Ranking lists help authorities to identify their 'weak points' and then to draft and implement steps aimed at improving their position on the list. International organizations dealing with cultural diversity of the peoples of the world, e.g., UNESCO, receive an information map showing the movement (improvement or deterioration in the position) of the regions on the ranking list of the Mongolic national resources potential.
Further elaboration of the methodology for assessment of Mongolic national cultural resources potential addresses the most problematic 'bottlenecks' impeding development of the potential's components. To a great extent, such 'bottlenecks' are the reason for multiple contradictions and disparities. To sum up, we can determine overall ranking of each component of the Mongolic national cultural tourism resources potential for all the regions: natural conditions, historic and cultural resources, and socioeconomic conditions.
The highest assessment value derived for a particular component (natural conditions, historic and cultural resources, and socio-economic conditions) reflects the greatest differentiation between the regions, and the lowest one reflects a lower difference between the regions for the component under review. This analysis will enable determining the areas for increasing the efficiency of policies aimed at the development of the Mongolic national cultural resources potential.
6. Interpretation of the results obtained
The quality of the assessment methodology is verified by using econometric modeling methods. The idea is simple: in case the assessment shows that the region has a high cultural tourism potential the gross regional product will be higher, and V.V.
To perform a full scale test of this hypothesis, we need to develop an econometric model of dependencies between the per capita GRP values and the integrated value of the Mongolic national cultural resources potential. The significance of the resulting equation will be assessed by applying the most common method in the statistics tools kit, namely by means of the correlation coefficient.
3. Results
The rating list in this work is based on a system of parameters used by the national statistics agencies of the countries under examination. The previous paragraph described the system for assessing the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources, which is comprised of 23 different indicators.
Table 2 displays the data for the areas densely inhabited by Mongolic people across the set of 23 indicators reflecting natural, cultural-historical, and socio-economic factors.
Table 2
Source Data
Groups Indicators Ethnic Buryatia Republic of Kalmykia IMAR China Mongolia
Climate Average summer temperature, °C 20.7 24 22 17
Number of days without permanent snow cover 184 215 221 214
Natural-climatic Total length of the river network, km 156,423 4,007.9 33,000 67,000
Combined area of the lake systems, km2 33,532.8 687.5 2,200 16,003
Number of mineral water springs and springs for mud baths 407 110 144 108
Flora Total area under forests, km2 237,092 360 261,300 175,000
Special protection natural areas Number of significant natural sites 323 42 187 156
Total area under special protection natural areas, km2 33,225.3 10,843.35 138,047 122,904
Historical monuments Number of significant archeological sites 1,113 51 836 1,212
Number of significant historical sites 623 290 179 320
Cultural heritage sites Number of significant archeological sites 319 19 76 117
Number of cultural leisure sites (museums, theaters, concert halls, cultural centers, permanent exhibitions, and galleries) 186 136 1,301 178
Number sites of traditional culture (ethnographical centers) 21 7 4 20
Sites of cult Number of monasteries 27 29 28 160
Outdoor activities sites Number of sporting venues and facilities 1,766 532 1,448 640
Health improvement facilities Number of health resorts, specialized medical centers, etc. 88 3 113 17
Public catering facilities Public catering facilities 1,534 292 13,690 1,950
Accommodation establishments Number of hotels, hostels, etc. 368 59 12,570 1,800
Transportation infrastructure Paved roads, km 10,688.4 3,122.1 263,551 10,000
Federal highways, km 977.4 518.3 35,315.8 5,100
Railroads, km 1,241 165 12,700 1,810
Number of bus and railroad depots, wharfs, seaports, and river ports 27 3 135 64
Tourist information facilities Tourist information facilities 55 22 34 403
Table 3 provides the values for the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources across the areas densely inhabited by Mongolic people and the placings for the areas based on the indicators.
Table 3
Values for the Potential of Mongolic National Cultural Tourism Resources across the Areas Densely Inhabited by Mongolic People
Region P Place
Ethnic Buryatia 59.31 2
Republic of Kalmykia 18.23 4
IMAR (China) 68.98 1
Mongolia 50.71 3
Substituting literal symbols for numerical values next will help to improve the overall clarity of the ratings system (Table 4). The largest potential is in the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, closely followed by Ethnic Buryatia, which, in turn, is closely followed by Mongolia. The Republic of Kalmykia has a very low level of potential in Mongolic national cultural tourism resources.
Table 4
Rating Values for the Potential of Mongolic National Cultural Tourism Resources and Their Qualitative Interpretation
Class Rating score, % Tourism potential development level
Zone A - superior level. Areas with the best conditions for realizing the potential of national
Mongolic resources
A 71-100 highest
Zone B - high level. Areas with good conditions for realizing the potential national Mongolic resources. An active focus on adopting relevant technological innovations and employing relevant tools and methods for realizing the potential
B++ 61-70 very high
B+ 51-60 high
B 41-50 higher than medium
Zone C - low level. Fragmented use of the potential of national Mongolic resources
C++ 31-40 lower than medium
C+ 21-30 low
C 11-20 very low
Zone D - unsatisfactory level. Areas that are not suitable for the implementation of tourism
projects
D 0-10 unsatisfactory
Table 5 displays the data regarding the three key components of the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources across the regions.
Table 5
Componential Assessment of the Potential of Mongolic National Cultural Tourism Resources across the Regions
Region Natural Cultural-historical Socio-economic P Rating
Ethnic Buryatia 87.36 70.50 26.92 59.31 B+
Republic of Kalmykia 31.70 19.77 5.22 18.23 C
IMAR (China) 67.24 43.01 87.83 68.98 B++
Mongolia 63.70 66.16 28.86 50.71 B
As evidenced in Table 5, Ethnic Buryatia has the greatest potential in terms of the natural component. This, above all, is associated with the region's geographical location and immediate proximity to Lake Baikal, a World Heritage site. The smallest potential in this context is in the Republic of Kalmykia.
The way in terms of the cultural-historical component is led by Ethnic Buryatia, which is characterized by cultural diversity due to its multi-ethnic and multi-faith population. In fact, the Republic of Buryatia is often dubbed as Russia in miniature. The smallest potential in this area is in the Republic of Kalmykia.
The greatest differentiation between the areas is in the socio-economic component. The Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region is three times ahead of the rest of the regions on this group of indicators. This may be attributed to the overall high level of socioeconomic development in China, which has invested heavily in creating the conditions for development, including the development of the tourism sector. The smallest potential on the socio-economic component is in the Republic of Kalmykia.
Table 6 displays the data regarding the average level of the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources for the entire group.
Table 6
Rating Assessment of the Average Level of the Potential of Mongolic National Cultural Tourism Resources
Component Rating assessment Rating class
Natural 62.50 B++
Cultural-historical 49.86 B
Socio-economic 37.21 C++
Integrated assessment 49.86 B
Across the Mongolic world, the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources has an integrated assessment of B. The largest value across the components is with the natural factor, followed by the cultural-historical one. The socio-economic component has a very low assessment. This figures, as the regions densely inhabited by Mongolic people are characterized by wide areas, floods, low levels of industrial action, and a large number of special protection natural areas [9].
Next, the study will assess the effect of the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources on an area's socio-economic status using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. The ranks are a set of sequence numbers for the entities under study. There can be more than one scenario in exploring the two parameters describing the group of entities: a 100% match between the rank values denotes a close direct relationship, whilst an absolute mismatch means there is a close inverse relationship.
To investigate the socio-economic level of development of the areas inhabited by Mongolic people, the study will employ the following two indicators:
- gross regional product;
- size of the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources.
Table 7 provides the data regarding the size of the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources and GRP. The universe will be the four regions inhabited by Mongolic people.
Table 7
Source Data for Calculating the Rank Correlation Coefficient
Region GRP/GDP, billion USD, 2019 P, 2020
Ethnic Buryatia 3.94 59.31
Republic of Kalmykia 1.19 18.23
IMAR 245.89 68.98
Mongolia 47.088 50.71
Next, based on the source data, the study will establish the ranks for each category under examination (Table 8).
Table 8
Ranks for Calculating Spearman's Coefficient
Region GRP/GDP rank P rank (dx - dy)2
Ethnic Buryatia 3 2 1
Republic of Kalmykia 4 4 0
IMAR 1 1 0
Mongolia 2 3 1
The matrix generation method is checked for correctness in the process of checksum calculation:
(1 + n)n (1 + 4)4
S
xij =
2
2
= 10
The cumulative values in the matrix columns are identical to each other and to the checksum, hence there are no errors in the matrix generation process.
Then, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient is calculated according to the formula:
p = 1 p = 1
6 *
£d2 n3 — n
6 *
2
43 — 4
= 0.8
It is clear that the link between the attributes Y and X can be defined as strong and direct.
The results from conducting the mathematical analysis and putting together the model perfectly suggest that an increase in values for Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in the areas densely inhabited by Mongolic people will lead to an increase in GRP.
The above link confirms the idea that the realization of the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in the areas densely inhabited by Mongolic people increases their asymmetry. Rating the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in the areas densely inhabited by Mongolic people on a regular basis may be helpful in a variety of ways.
4. Conclusions
In the 21st century, amid the continued development of international tourism, there appears to be a trend of increased use of the potential of national ethnic resources [10, 11]. However, many countries are not devoting enough attention to the proper use of this potential and the resources available in them. In the areas inhabited by Mongolic people, business entities, which are no strangers to dealing with economic hardships, are perfectly aware of the significance of focusing on innovation and ramping up the potential of Mongolic national cultural tourism resources in the areas densely inhabited by Mongolic people.
Maintaining a rating system for the potential of Mongolic national resources in the areas densely inhabited by Mongolic people can be useful in terms of assessing the performance of the authorities, as well as implementing future tourism projects.
References
1. Dagbaeva S.D.-N., Tsyrenov D.D. Integration activity of the states and regions of Russia within the Great Silk Road // Espacios, 2019, 40(22). pp. 24
2. Dirin, D. A., & Kuskov, A. S. (2011). Analiz metodik kompleksnoi otsenki turistsko-rekreatsionnogo potentsiala territorii [An analysis of methodologies for integrated assessment of the tourism-and-recreation potential of an area]. In Sovremennye problemy geografii: Sbornik nauchnykh trudov [Current issues in geography: A collection of scholarly works] (pp. 70-79). Saratov, Russia: SO EAGO. (in Russian).
3. Dunets, A. N., Krupochkin, E. P., & Tel'tsova, A. A. Nekotorye metodicheskie aspekty otsenki turistsko-rekreatsionnogo potentsiala dlya tselei territorial'nogo planirovaniya [Certain methodological aspects of assessing the tourism-and-recreation potential for the purposes of territorial planning]. Izvestiya Altaiskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta, 3-2, 108-113. (in Russian).
4. Fedulin, A. A., Gavrilov, A. Yu., & Novikova, N. G. (2012). Sovremennye podkhody k opredeleniyu resursnogo potentsiala tourisma [The latest approaches to determining the resource potential of tourism]. ServisPlus, 1, 38-44. (in Russian).
5. Klochkov, V. A. (1996). Opredelenie prirodno-resursnogo potentsiala territorii kak element optimizatsii prirodopol'zovaniya [Determination of an area's natural-resource potential as an element of optimizing the use of natural resources]. In Territorial'naya organizatsiya ob-shchestva i upravleniya v regionakh [The territorial organization of society and administration in regions] (pp. 107-109). Voronezh, Russia: VGPU. (in Russian).
6. Kudryavtsev, A. F., Sidorov, V. P., Skobeleva, O. A. (2006). Vybor operatsionno-territorial'nykh edinits pri otsenke rekreatsionnogo potentsiala [The selection of operational-territorial units in assessing recreational potential]. In Tourism i regional'noe razvitie. Sbornik nauchnykh statei. Vypusk 4 [Tourism and regional development: A collection of scholarly articles. Issue 4] (pp. 85-88). Smolensk, Russia: Universum. (in Russian).
7. Mos'kina, I. Yu. (2013). Analiz sootvetstviya turistskoi deyatel'nosti v Pribaikal'skom regione kriteriyam ustoichivosti [An analysis of the degree to which tourism activity in the Baikal region matches the sustainability criteria]. Izvestiya Irkutskoi Gosudarstvennoi Ekonomicheskoi Akademii (Baikal'skii Gosudarstvennyi Universitet Ekonomiki i Prava), 6, 6. (in Russian).
8. Sokolova, N. V. (1988). Prirodno-resursnyi potentsial territorii: Soderzhanie ponyati-ya, metody otsenki [An area's natural-resource potential: Its concept and methods for assessing it]. VestnikLeningradskogo Universiteta. Seriya 7, 3, 125-130. (in Russian).
9. Starkova, I. I., Krylasova, E. A., & Dorzhieva, L. G. (2020). Vodnyi tourism kak odno iz napravlenii v rekreatsii [Nautical tourism as an area in recreation]. Vestnik Buryatskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Ekonomika i Menedzhment, 2, 34-40. (in Russian).
10. Tsyrenov D.D. The Republic of Buryatia in the new space of Siberia and the Far East // Espacios, 2019, 40(20). pp. 28
11. Tsyrenov D.D., Slepneva L.R. Forecasting the socio-economic development of the Republic of Buryatia in the context of labor potential // International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 2018, 9(11), pp. 2070-2075
The article was submitted 28.01.2022; approved after reviewing 29.01.2022; accepted
for publication 01.02.2022.
КОМПОНЕНТНАЯ И КОМПЛЕКСНАЯ ОЦЕНКА ПОТЕНЦИАЛА МОНГОЛЬСКИХ НАЦИОНАЛЬНЫХ КУЛЬТУРНО-ТУРИСТИЧЕСКИХ
РЕСУРСОВ
Пэн Лин доцент
Сианьский университет Цзяотун
710049, КНР, г. Сиань, ул. Щиан Нин Си Лу, 28
peng_ling2002@126.com
Янгутова Аяна Банзаровна Институт географии Китайской академии наук КНР, Пекин, район Чаоян, ул. Датун, 11а mishayang999@mail.ru
Аннотация. В статье предложена методика компонентной и интегральной оценки потенциала монгольских национальных ресурсов культурного туризма. В качестве компонентов выбраны: природный, культурно-исторический и социально-экономический аспекты, каждый из которых включает в себя корректные параметры. Каждый из параметров, образующих природный компонент, формирует общий интерес туристов к определенной территории. Культурно-исторический компонент напрямую связан с формированием интереса к культурному туризму. Социально-экономический компонент связан с формированием инфраструктурных условий для реализации потенциала культурного туризма. Предложенная методика основана на открытых данных, отслеживаемых органами государственной статистики, и включает в себя 23 разных параметра, сведенных к единому интегральному показателю. Это дает возможность ранжировать исследуемые территории компактного проживания монгольских народов по уровню потенциала монгольских национальных ресурсов культурного туризма. Верификация предложенной модели произведена с использованием коэффициента ранговой корреляции Спирмена. Ключевые слова: потенциал монгольских национальных ресурсов, культурный туризм, пространственное распределение потенциала туризма, единое этнокультурное пространство монгольских народов.
Для цитирования
Peng Ling, Yangutova A. B. Componential and Integrated Assessment of the Potential of Mongolic National Cultural Tourism Resources // Вестник Бурятского государственного университета. Экономика и менеджмент. 2022. № 1. С. 58-69.
Статья поступила в редакцию 28.01.2022; одобрена после рецензирования 29.01.2022; принята к публикации 01.02.2022.
