|
|||||
|
|
| 休闲城市评价指标体系及其实证研究 | |
| 引用本文： | 曹新向,苗长虹,陈玉英,王伟红.休闲城市评价指标体系及其实证研究[J].地理研究,2010,29(9):1695-1705. |
| 作者姓名： | 曹新向 苗长虹 陈玉英 王伟红 |
| 作者单位： | 1. 河南大学黄河文明与可持续发展研究中心,开封,475001;河南大学旅游系,开封,475001 2. 河南大学黄河文明与可持续发展研究中心,开封,475001;河南大学环境与规划学院,开封,475001 3. 河南大学旅游系,开封,475001 |
| 基金项目： | 教育部人文社科基地重大项目，河南省社科规划项目 |
| 摘 要： | 目前,迫切需要一套切实可行的评价指标体系和评价方法来衡量城市自身的休闲实力和休闲发展能力,以此判断一个城市是否具有建设休闲城市的资质和条件。本文综述了当前人们对休闲城市评价指标体系的看法,在对休闲城市内涵分析的基础上,构建了一套切实可行的休闲城市评价指标体系。以此为依据,借助SPSS统计分析软件,运用因子分析法评价了杭州、成都、大连、青岛和南京等15个城市的休闲水平和实力。结果表明,深圳、杭州、成都、北京休闲主体意识、休闲设施水平较高,而厦门、上海、大连、杭州休闲环境较为适宜。就综合休闲实力相比,北京、上海、深圳、广州、杭州水平较高,充分证明了其构建休闲城市的实力和基础。 |
| 关 键 词： | 休闲城市 评价指标体系 定量方法 |
| 收稿时间： | 2009-05-03 |
| 修稿时间： | 2010-03-26 |
Study on the index system to evaluate leisure city and its application |
|
| CAO Xin-xiang,MIAO Chang-hong,CHEN Yu-ying,WANG Wei-hong.Study on the index system to evaluate leisure city and its application[J].Geographical Research,2010,29(9):1695-1705. | |
| Authors: | CAO Xin-xiang MIAO Chang-hong CHEN Yu-ying WANG Wei-hong |
| Institution: | 1. Center for Yellow River Civilisation and Sustainable Development, Henan University, Kaifeng 475001, Henan, China; 2. Department of Tourism, Henan University, Kaifeng 475001, Henan, China; 3. College of Environment and Planning, Henan University, Kaifeng 475001, Henan, China |
| Abstract: | In order to survey whether a city has the potentials and conditions to develop leisure economy at present, we need to set up a workable evaluation index system and evaluation method to measure the leisure degree and leisure development capacity of a city. This article first analyzed different viewpoints on the Leisure City evaluation index system and summarized the concept and meaning of Leisure City, and then discussed the index system and quantitative method to evaluate Leisure City. With the help of SPSS software, this study took 15 cities in China including Hangzhou, Chengdu, Dalian, Qingdao and Nanjing as examples and analyzed their leisure level and strength. The result showed that Shenzhen, Hangzhou, Chengdu and Beijing had higher leisure consciousness and richer and better leisure facilities, while Xiamen, Shanghai, Dalian and Hangzhou had more appropriate leisure environment. As far as integrated leisure strength was concerned, Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou and Hangzhou had higher leisure comprehensive development degree. Finally, we discussed the issue on how China would build top Leisure City, and put forward some future research proposals on this issue. |
| Keywords: | Leisure City evaluation index system quantitative method |
| 本文献已被 万方数据 等数据库收录！ | |
| 点击此处可从《地理研究》浏览原始摘要信息 | |
| 点击此处可从《地理研究》下载免费的PDF全文 | |