Attitudes and preferences of visitors of Krka National Park, Croatia

  • Tamás Telbisz Department of Physical Geography, Faculty of Science, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
  • Ivan Šulc Department of Geography, Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
  • László Mari Department of Physical Geography, Faculty of Science, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
  • Petra Radeljak Kaufmann Department of Geography, Faculty of Science, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
Keywords: national park, protected area, questionnaire, tourism, karst, spatial inequality, geotourism, COVID


The primary function of national parks (NPs) is nature conservation, but for the majority of them, tourism also plays an important role. Tourism generates significant incomes, but the benefits are often unequally distributed in space, as are the disadvantages. The karst regions are generally less developed terrains in terms of traditional livelihoods, but due to their special morphology, tourism offers great opportunities. Nonetheless, mass tourism can also pose increased environmental risks. In this article, we examine the above questions on the example of Krka NP, especially from the perspective of tourists, as we conducted a questionnaire survey with visitors. The results confirmed that there is a high degree of spatial inequality both in the awareness of attractions and the distribution of tourist accommodation. This fact has already been recognised by the management of the NP, and serious steps have already been taken to reduce inequality, but their impact is not yet significant enough. Based on the survey, tourism in Krka NP is determined by same-day visits. Tourists who come here primarily consider waterfalls, lakes and rivers to be the most important values of the landscape, while cultural values are considered less significant and even less known. Local products are virtually unknown in the NP palette, so this could be a direction for development. Another point that could be developed is the awareness of visitors in the field of karstification. As the survey was conducted during COVID period, its impact on tourism was also briefly examined. This impact was manifested in the fact that the proportion of retirees and tourist buses was very small, whereas the majority of visitors (90%) arrived in the NP as independent travellers. For one third of foreigners, COVID played a role in choosing Croatia as a destination. As for domestic tourists, two thirds chose to find a destination in Croatia because of COVID.


Allan, M., Dowling, R.K. and Sanders, D. 2015. The motivations for visiting geosites: The case of Crystal Cave, Western Australia. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites 16. (2): 141-152.

Antić, A., Tomić, N. and Marković, S. 2020. Karstbased geotourism in Eastern Carphatian Serbia: Exploration and evaluation of natural stone bridges. Geoconservation Research 3. (2): 62-80.

Balmford, A., Beresford, J., Green, J., Naidoo, R., Walpole, M. and Manica, A. 2009. A global perspective on trends in nature-based tourism. PLoS Biology 7. (6): e1000144.

Božić, S. and Tomić, N. 2015. Canyons and gorges as potential geotourism destinations in Serbia: comparative analysis from two perspectives - 'general geotourists' and 'pure geotourists'. Open Geosciences 7. (1): 531-546.

Brilhá, J. 2002. Geoconservation and protected areas. Environmental Conservation 29. (3): 273-276.

Butler, R.W. and Boyd, S.W. (eds.) 2000. Tourism and National Parks: Issues and Implications. Chichester UK, Wiley.

Duval, M. 2006. Tourism and preservation policies in karst areas: Comparision betwen the Škocjan Caves (Slovenia) and the Ardèche Gorge (France). Acta Carsologica 35. (2-3): 23-35.

Farsani, N.T., Coelho, C. and Costa, C. 2011. Geotourism and geoparks as novel strategies for socio-economic development in rural areas. International Journal of Tourism Research 13. (1): 68-81.

Frost, W. and Hall, C.M. 2015. Tourism and National Parks: International Perspectives on Development, Histories and Change. London, Routledge.

Gojmerac, M. 2018. Održivi razvoj turizma Nacionalnog parka Krka (Sustainable development of tourism in Krka National Park). PhD Thesis. Karlovac, Karlovac University of Applied Sciences, Business Department.

Gordon, J.E., Crofts, R., Díaz-Martínez, E. and Woo, K.S. 2018. Enhancing the role of geoconservation in protected area management and nature conservation. Geoheritage 10. (2): 191-203.

Hose, T.A. 2008. Towards a history of geotourism: definitions, antecedents and the future. Geological Society Special Publications 300. (1): 37-60. London.

Kalisch, D. and Klaphake, A. 2008. The dilemma of recreational use versus nature protection - Responses from national park authorities in Austria, Germany and Switzerland. In Management for Protection and Sustainable Development. The Fourth International Conference on Monitoring and Management of Visitor Flows in Recreational and Protected Areas. Conference Proceedings MMV4. Eds.: Raschi, A. and Trampetti, S., Montecatini Terme, Italy, CNR-Ibimet, 404-408.

Koderman, M. and Opačić, V.T. (eds.) 2020. Challenges of Tourism Development in Protected Areas of Croatia and Slovenia. Koper, University of Primorska Press and Croatian Geographical Society.

Kőszegi, M., Bottlik, Zs., Telbisz, T. and Mari, L. 2019. A "nemzeti park" koncepció tér- és időbeli változásai (Spatial and temporal changes in the concept of "national park"). Földrajzi Közlemények 143. (4): 308-323.

Krka National Park, 2019. Analiza ankete provedene u Nacionalnom parku "Krka" 2019. (Analysis on results of surveys in Krka National Park 2019). Šibenik, Krka Naciolnalni Park.

Krpina, V. 2015. Analysis of the relation between visitors and protected natural areas in the Zadar County. Šumarski list 139. (11-12): 535-551.

Kuenzi, C. and McNeely, J. 2008. Nature-based tourism. In Global Risk Governance: Concept and Practice Using the IRGC Framework. International Risk Governance Council Bookseries. Eds.: Renn, O. and Walker, K.D., Dordrecht, Springer, 155-178.

Lajić, I. and Mišetić, R. 2013. Demographic changes on Croatian islands at the beginning of the 21st century. Migracijske i etničke teme 29. (2): 169-199.

Lazzari, M. and Aloia, A. 2014. Geoparks, geoheritage and geotourism: opportunities and tools in sustainable development of the territory. Geojournal of Tourism and Geosites 13. (1): 8-9.

Mari, L., Tábori, Zs., Šulc, I., Radeljak Kaufmann, P., Milanović, R., Gessert, A., Imecs, Z., Baricz, A. and Telbisz, T. 2022. The system and spatial distribution of protected areas in Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, Serbia and Croatia. Hungarian Geographical Bulletin71. (2): 99-115.

Mayer, M., Müller, M., Woltering, M., Arnegger, J. and Job, H. 2010. The economic impact of tourism in six German national parks. Landscape and Urban Planning 97. (2): 73-82.

McKeever, P.J. and Zouros, N. 2005. Geoparks: Celebrating Earth heritage, sustaining local communities. Episodes 28. (4): 274-278.

Mose, I. 2007. Google-Books-ID: fl3dR_WiuKwC. Protected Areas and Regional Development in Europe: Towards a New Model for the 21st Century. Aldershot, Ashgate Publishing Ltd.

Mrđen, S. and Barić, D. 2016. Demographic ageing of the population in the County of Šibenik-Knin: Grandparent boom. Geoadria 21. (1): 113-142.

Nestorová Dická, J., Gessert, A., Bryndzová, L. and Telbisz, T. 2020. Behavioural survey of local inhabitants' views and attitudes about Slovak Karst National Park in Slovakia. Sustainability 12. (23): 10029.

Papageorgiou, K. and Kassioumis, K. 2005. The national park policy context in Greece: Park users' perspectives of issues in park administration. Journal for Nature Conservation 13. (4): 231-246.

Pejnović, D. and Husanović-Pejnović, D. 2008. Causes and consequences of demographic development in the territory of Velebit Nature Park, 1857-2001. Periodicum biologorum 110. (2): 195-204.

Petrić, L. and Mandić, A. 2014. Visitor management tools for protected areas focused on sustainable tourism development: The Croatian experience. Environmental Engineering and Management Journal 13. (6): 1483-1495.

Radeljak Kaufmann, P. 2016. Challenges of the regional development in Dalmatia. Studia Miejskie 24. 107-127.

Radeljak Kaufmann, P. 2020. Rural tourism in the surroundings of Krka National Park: Factors of development and spatial impacts. In Challenges of Tourism Development in Protected Areas of Croatia and Slovenia. Eds.: Koderman, M. and Opačić, V.T., Koper-Zagreb, University of Primorska Press - Croatian Geographical Society, 53-73.

Reinius, S.W. and Fredman, P. 2007. Protected areas as attractions. Annals of Tourism Research 34. (4): 839-854.

Romano, B. 1995. National parks policy and mountain depopulation: A case study in the Abruzzo Region of the Central Apennines, Italy. Mountain Research and Development 15 (2): 121-132.

Štrba, Ľ. 2019. Analysis of criteria affecting geosite visits by general public: A case of Slovak (geo)tourists. Geoheritage 11. (2): 291-300.

Šulc, I. and Valjak, V. 2012. Zaštićena područja u funkciji održivog razvoja hrvatskog otočja - primjer otoka Mljeta (Protected areas as a factor of sustainable development of the Croatian island - the example of Mljet island). Croatian Geographical Bulletin 74. (1): 161-185.

Sütő, L., Ésik, Zs., Nagy, R., Homoki, E., Novák, T. and Szepesi, J. 2020. Promoting geoheritage through a field-based geo-education event: A case study of the Hungarian Geotope Day in the Bükk Region Geopark. Geoconservation Research 3. 81-96.

Szepesi, J., Ésik, Zs., Soós, I., Novák, T.J., Sütő, L., Rózsa, P., Lukács, R. and Harangi, Sz. 2018. Földtani objektumok értékminősítése: módszertani értékelés a védelem, bemutatás, fenntarthatóság és a geoturisztikai fejlesztések tükrében (Methodological review of geosite inventory and assessment work in the light of protection, sustainability and the development of geotourism). Földtani Közlöny 148. (2): 143-160.

Telbisz, T., Bottlik, Zs., Mari, L. and Kőszegi, M. 2014. The impact of topography on social factors: A case study of Montenegro. Journal of Mountain Science 11. (1): 131-141.

Telbisz, T., Bottlik, Zs., Mari, L. and Petrvalská, A. 2015. Exploring relationships between karst terrains and social features by the example of Gömör-Torna Karst (Hungary-Slovakia). Acta Carsologica 44. (1): 121-137.

Telbisz, T., Imecs, Z., Mari, L. and Bottlik, Zs. 2016. Changing human-environment interactions in medium mountains: The Apuseni Mountains (Romania) as a case study. Journal of Mountain Science 13. (9): 1675-1687.

Telbisz, T., Stergiou, C.L., Mindszenty, A. and Chatzipetros, A. 2019. Geological and geomorphological characteristics of Vikos Gorge and Tymphi Mountain (Northern Pindos National Park, Greece) and karst-related social processes of the region. Acta Carsologica 48. (1): 29-42.

Telbisz, T., Gruber, P., Mari, L., Kőszegi, M., Bottlik, Zs. and Standovár, T. 2020. Geological heritage, geotourism and local development in Aggtelek National Park (NE Hungary). Geoheritage 12. (1): 5.

Telbisz, T., Ćalić, J., Kovačević-Majkić, J., Milanović, R., Brankov, J. and Micić, J. 2021. Karst geoheritage of Tara National Park (Serbia) and its geotouristic potential. Geoheritage 13. (4): 88.

Telbisz, T. and Mari, L. 2020. The significance of karst areas in European national parks and geoparks. Open Geosciences 12. (1): 117-132.

Telbisz, T., Radeljak Kaufmann, P. and Bočić, N. 2022. Inland-coastal demographic transformations in a karst area: a case study of the surroundings of Krka National Park (Croatia). Journal of Mountain Science 19. (2): 305-321.

Trakolis, D. 2001. Perceptions, preferences and reactions of local inhabitants in Vikos-Aoos National Park, Greece. Environmental Management 28. (5): 665-676.

Zgłobicki, W. and Baran-Zgłobicka, B. 2013. Geomorphological heritage as a tourist attraction. A case study in Lubelskie Province, SE Poland. Geoheritage 5. (2): 137-149.

How to Cite
TelbiszT., ŠulcI., MariL., & Radeljak KaufmannP. (2022). Attitudes and preferences of visitors of Krka National Park, Croatia. Hungarian Geographical Bulletin, 71(2), 117-132.
Benefits, challenges and opportunities of karst national parks