Abstract
ABSTRACT A number of basic principles concerning tourist and outdoor recreation facilities are being developed on a priori grounds rather than from empirically derived data. One of the most fundamental of such generalizations relates to the effect of a facility on its hinterland, the degree of impact being postulated as a function of the friction of distance. The basic purpose of this study is to test the validity of this concept by analyzing the actual impact of two similar tourist attractions in Pennsylvania on their hinterlands. Major discrepancies are found to exist between the pattern of geometrically regular hypothetical impact zones and the highly irregular patterns actually produced by the two test facilities. Analysis of conditions that might create such irregularities yields null results in the case of 1) invalid data, 2) accessibility, and 3) intervening opportunity factors, and significant correlation in the case of the 4) regional orientation, 5) familiarity, and 6) advertising factors.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
