Rekreatiivsete tegevuste kuumad alad Eesti looduses ning linnasiseste ja -lähedaste rohealade kasutus
Laen...
Kuupäev
2022
Kättesaadav alates
03.09.2022
Autorid
Ajakirja pealkiri
Ajakirja ISSN
Köite pealkiri
Kirjastaja
Eesti Maaülikool
Abstrakt
Rekreatiivsed tegevused muutuvad üha populaarsemaks ning seoses linnastumisega kasvab
ka nende olulisus ühiskonnas. Eestis on rajatud palju harrastustegevusteks sobilikke paiku,
kuid piirkonniti on need ülekoormatud, asuvad suuresti kaitsealal või ei paku kõigile
sihtgruppidele sobivaid võimalusi. Töö eesmärk on kaardistada harrastajate meelissihtkohad
Eesti looduses, leida sihtkohad, kuhu koonduvad mitmete tegevuste harrastajad, ning uurida,
millises mahus tegeletakse harrastustega linnasisestes ja -lähedastes sihtkohtades. Andmeid
koguti ankeetküsimustikuga, mida jagati harrastajatele võistluskorraldajate ja spordiliitude
kaudu, kogukonna gruppide vahendusel jms. Küsimustik oli kõikidele harrastajatele
samasugune, andmed koguti teksti kujul ning sihtkohta puudutavatest andmetest töödeldi
ruumiandmed. Töös kasutati 2323 harrastaja vastuseid ja selgitati välja 601
harrastustegevuse sihtkohta, millest 47,9% asub kaitsealal, 40,8% tegeletakse kahe või
enama harrastustegevusega ning 52,6% asub Eesti 5 suurima linna 30 km raadiuses. Kõige
enam nimetati Harjumaal (26,6%) ning Tartumaal (12,3%) asuvaid sihtkohti. Kõige suurema
kasutusega kuumad alad on Harku-Nõmme, Järve, Pirita (kõik Tallinnas), Kõrvemaa
piirkond ning Lõuna-Eestis Elva ümbrus, Otepää ja Haanja. Tulemused näitavad, et suur osa
igapäevasest harrastustegevusest kuhjub linnasisestele ja -lähedastele aladele, kaitsealadele
ning paljudes sihtkohtades tegeletakse mitme erineva harrastustegevusega. Mitmete
harrastajate jaoks ei seondu esmatähtsad looduses viibimise motiivid väärtusliku
looduskeskkonnaga või looduse nautimisega, vaid nt spordi ja eneseteostusega. Et
vähendada kaitsealade suurt koormust igapäevaste harrastustegevuste arvelt, tuleb
planeerida rekreatiivseid alasid kaitsealadelt välja, sh vähemväärtuslikele rohealadele,
vanadesse karjääridesse, tehnoalade jms ümbrusesse, mis pakub põnevust ja
sportimisvõimalust, kuid samas ei satu vastuollu kaitsealade loodusväärtustega.
Rekreatiivsed alad peavad olema ruumiliselt ja ajaliselt planeeritud ja korraldatud, et vältida
ökoloogilisi ja kasutajate omavahelisi sotsiaalseid konflikte ning seeläbi rekreatiivse
koormustaluvuse piiri ületamist. Olles osa suuremast uuringust, on töö tulemuste sidumisel
küsimustike kaudu kogutud kvalitatiivsete andmetega võimalik teha täiendavaid järeldusi,
millised on peamised rekreatiivsete alade murekohad ja võimalikud lahendused, mis oleksid
sobilikud nii harrastajatele, kohalikele omavalitsustele kui ka kaitseala valitsejatele.
Recreative activities are gaining popularity and their importance in an urbanizing society is rising. Suitable destinations for these activities are in some regions overpopulated, greatly on protected areas or not suitable for all types of activities. The purpose of this paper is to map favorite destinations of recreationists, map destinations that are used by various groups of recreationists and research on what capacity are destinations within cities and nearby areas used. Data was collected via a questionnaire that was dispensed with the help of event organizers, sports associations and via community groups in social media. The questionnaire was the same for each group of recreationists, data was collected in a text format and destination related data was processed into spatial data. A total of 2323 recipients answers were used with the result of 601 destinations. Out of those 47,9% is in protected areas, 40,8% is used for two or more activities and 52,6% is located in the 30 km radius from five largest cities in Estonia. Counties with the most named destinations are Harju (26,6%) and Tartu (12,3%). Hotspots with the largest use are Harku-Nõmme, Järve, Pirita (all in Tallinn), Kõrvemaa and in Southern Estonia Elva area, Otepää and Haanja. Results show that a large amount of everyday recreation is done on green areas within cities or nearby cities, in protected areas and many destinations are used for multiple activities. For many recreationists, motives for being in nature are not connected with enjoying nature or valuable natural environments, but rather with sport and achievement. To minimize the load on protected areas at the expense of everyday recreation, recreational areas have to be planned outside of protected areas, e.g. less valuable green areas, old quarries and industrial landscapes, that offer excitement, opportunities but does not contradict with natural values of protected areas. Recreational areas have to be spatially and timely planned and managed to avoid ecological and social conflicts between recreationists and avoid exceeding the limit of recreational carrying capacity. Being a part of a larger research, the results of this study can be further analyzed with qualitative data collected via the questionnaire and make further conclusions about what are the main worries and possible solutions for recreational areas that would please recreationists, local managers and administrators of protected areas.
Recreative activities are gaining popularity and their importance in an urbanizing society is rising. Suitable destinations for these activities are in some regions overpopulated, greatly on protected areas or not suitable for all types of activities. The purpose of this paper is to map favorite destinations of recreationists, map destinations that are used by various groups of recreationists and research on what capacity are destinations within cities and nearby areas used. Data was collected via a questionnaire that was dispensed with the help of event organizers, sports associations and via community groups in social media. The questionnaire was the same for each group of recreationists, data was collected in a text format and destination related data was processed into spatial data. A total of 2323 recipients answers were used with the result of 601 destinations. Out of those 47,9% is in protected areas, 40,8% is used for two or more activities and 52,6% is located in the 30 km radius from five largest cities in Estonia. Counties with the most named destinations are Harju (26,6%) and Tartu (12,3%). Hotspots with the largest use are Harku-Nõmme, Järve, Pirita (all in Tallinn), Kõrvemaa and in Southern Estonia Elva area, Otepää and Haanja. Results show that a large amount of everyday recreation is done on green areas within cities or nearby cities, in protected areas and many destinations are used for multiple activities. For many recreationists, motives for being in nature are not connected with enjoying nature or valuable natural environments, but rather with sport and achievement. To minimize the load on protected areas at the expense of everyday recreation, recreational areas have to be planned outside of protected areas, e.g. less valuable green areas, old quarries and industrial landscapes, that offer excitement, opportunities but does not contradict with natural values of protected areas. Recreational areas have to be spatially and timely planned and managed to avoid ecological and social conflicts between recreationists and avoid exceeding the limit of recreational carrying capacity. Being a part of a larger research, the results of this study can be further analyzed with qualitative data collected via the questionnaire and make further conclusions about what are the main worries and possible solutions for recreational areas that would please recreationists, local managers and administrators of protected areas.
Kirjeldus
Magistritöö
Loodusturismi õppekaval
Märksõnad
magistritööd, rekreatsioon, rekreatsioon kaitsealadel, linnasisesed rohealad, rohealade planeerimine