International Journal of Emerging Trends in Management

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2026): International Journal of Emerging Trends in Management
Original reseach article

Interpretation and visitor management in national parks: Evidence from Fruška Gora

FULL TEXT ARTICLE (PDF)
  • Ivana Manevska,
  • Carmen Granito
Ivana Manevska
University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Sciences, Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Trg Dositeja Obradovića 3, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia
Bio
Carmen Granito
The Story Behind
Bio

Published 30.03.2026

Keywords

  • visitor management,
  • visitor interpretation,
  • national park management,
  • socio-demographic characteristics,
  • visitor segmentation

Copyright (c) 2026 opyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Emerging Trends in Management

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Interpretation and visitor management in national parks: Evidence from Fruška Gora. (2026). International Journal of Emerging Trends in Management, 2(1), 09-19. https://doi.org/10.65984/ETM2.1.2

Abstract

This study examines how visitors perceive interpretive panels and how these perceptions can inform adaptive visitor management strategies in Fruška Gora National Park, Serbia. Positioned within contemporary management trends that emphasize data-driven decision-making, visitor segmentation, and experience-centered governance, the research explores how socio-demographic characteristics influence perceptions of interpretive panels across three dimensions: Design, Engagement, and Meaning. Data were collected through an online survey (N = 385) and analyzed using independent t-tests and one-way ANOVA to identify differences among visitor groups. The findings reveal that age, education level, socio-economic status, and visit frequency significantly influence perceptions of interpretive panels, whereas gender and type of residence do not. Higher-educated and higher-income respondents demonstrated stronger engagement with interpretive content, while first-time visitors expressed more positive evaluations than repeat visitors, suggesting a novelty effect. These results highlight the managerial importance of differentiated interpretation strategies aligned with sustainable visitor management, stakeholder responsiveness, and inclusive communication. By integrating socio-demographic insights into interpretive planning, national parks can enhance visitor satisfaction, improve interpretive effectiveness, and support conservation goals.

Article history: Received (February 25, 2026); Revised (March 25, 2026); Accepted (March 26, 2026); Published online (March 30, 2026)

FULL TEXT ARTICLE (PDF)

References

  1. Ablett, P., & Dyer, P. (2009). Heritage and hermeneutics: Towards a broader interpretation of interpretation. Current Issues in Tourism, 12(3), 209–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500802316063
  2. Abrahams, E., & Bama, H. (2023). Heritage interpretation as a catalyst for sustainable ecotourism in protected areas: A systematic literature review. Studia Periegetica, 42(2). https://doi.org/10.58683/sp.581
  3. Akinjokun, A., Jusan, M., & Shahminan, R. (2018). Place attachment and determinants of living arrangement in the family house in Ibadan, Nigeria. African Population Studies, 32(3). https://doi.org/10.11564/32-3-1239
  4. Almuhrzi, H., Hughes, K., & Ballantyne, R. (2020). Exploring Arab and Western visitors’ interpretive experiences at an Omani heritage site: Does one size fit all? Journal of Heritage Tourism, 15(2), 180–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873x.2019.1632319
  5. Arani, Z., Zanjari, N., Delbari, A., Foroughan, M., & Harouni, G. (2021). Place attachment and aging: A scoping review. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 32(1), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/10911359.2020.1860852
  6. Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (2011). Using tourism free‐choice learning experiences to promote environmentally sustainable behaviour: The role of post‐visit “action resources.” Environmental Education Research, 17(2), 201–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2010.530645
  7. Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Falk, J. (2011). Visitors’ learning for environmental sustainability: Testing short- and long-term impacts of wildlife experiences. Visitor Studies, 14(2), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2011.623628
  8. Beck, L., & Cable, T. T. (2011). The gifts of interpretation: Fifteen guiding principles for interpreting nature and culture (3rd ed.). Sagamore Publishing.
  9. Black, R. (2018). Improving engagement between tourists and staff at natural and cultural heritage tourism sites: Exploring the concept of interpretive conversations. Tourism Recreation Research, 43(1), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2017.1382981
  10. Brian, R., Elisabeth, C., & Christophe, C. (2021). Connectedness to nature: Mapping the role of protected areas. Journal of Environmental Management, 293, Article 112771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112771
  11. Brochado, A., Veríssimo, J., & De Oliveira, J. (2022). Memorable tourism experiences, perceived value dimensions and behavioral intentions: A demographic segmentation approach. Tourism Review, 77(2). https://doi.org/10.1108/tr-09-2021-0433
  12. Butorac, B. (2007). Fruška Gora: Nature characteristics – flora (in Serbian). Belgrade.
  13. Clark, W., ViforJ, R., & Phelps, C. (2023). Place attachment and aging in place: Preferences and disruptions. Research on Aging, 46(3-4), 179–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/01640275231209683
  14. Colley, K., & Craig, T. (2019). Natural places: Perceptions of wildness and attachment to local greenspace. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 61, 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2018.12.007
  15. Counted, V., Moustafa, A., & Renzaho, A. (2018). Migration and sociodemographic factors associated with sense of place attitudes among migrants of African background in Northern and Western Netherlands. Journal of Community Psychology, 47(2), 238–253. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22118
  16. Cundill, G., Bezerra, J., Vos, A., & Ntingana, N. (2017). Beyond benefit sharing: Place attachment and the importance of access to protected areas for surrounding communities. Ecosystem Services, 28, 140–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.03.011
  17. Dasgupta, R., Basu, M., Hashimoto, S., Estoque, R., Kumar, P., Johnson, B., Mitra, B., & Mitra, P. (2022). Residents’ place attachment to urban green spaces in Greater Tokyo region: An empirical assessment of dimensionality and influencing socio-demographic factors. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 67, Article 127438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127438
  18. De Cicco, R., Dini, M., Curina, I., Francioni, B., & Cioppi, M. (2024). The influence of socio-demographic factors on feelings of attachment, involvement, loyalty attitudes, and environmentally responsible behavior toward a cultural destination. Turistica - Italian Journal of Tourism, 32(1). https://doi.org/10.70732/tijt.v32i1.18
  19. Dlamini, S., Tesfamichael, S., & Mokhele, T. (2021). Socio-demographic determinants of environmental attitudes, perceptions, place attachment, and environmentally responsible behaviour in Gauteng province, South Africa. Scientific African, 12, Article e00772. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2021.e00772
  20. Dlamini, S., Tesfamichael, S., Shiferaw, Y., & Mokhele, T. (2020). Socio-demographic determinants of place attachment in Gauteng, South Africa, using partial proportional odds models. GeoJournal, 87, 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-020-10240-1
  21. Dlamini, S., Tesfamichael, S., Weir-Smith, G., & Mokhele, T. (2022). Spatial pattern of environmental perception and place attachment in a diverse socio-economic context: The case of Gauteng province, South Africa. Journal of Spatial Information Science, 2022(25), 174–202. https://doi.org/10.5311/josis.2022.25.174
  22. Doğan, E., Kan, M., & Gülsün-Süleyman, S. (2020). Bringing heritage sites to life for visitors: Towards a conceptual framework for immersive experience. Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research (AHTR), 8(1), 76–99. https://doi.org/10.30519/ahtr.630783
  23. Dowling, R. K. (2013). Global geotourism – An emerging form of sustainable tourism. Czech Journal of Tourism, 2(2), 59–79. https://doi.org/10.2478/cjot-2013-0004
  24. Dumbrăveanu, D., Craciun, A., & Tudoricu, A. (2016). Principles of interpretation, tourism and heritage interpretation – The experience of Romanian museums. Human Geographies, 10(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.5719/hgeo.2016.101.4
  25. Echavarria, K., Samaroudi, M., Dibble, L., Silverton, E., & Dixon, S. (2022). Creative experiences for engaging communities with cultural heritage through place-based narratives. ACM Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage (JOCCH), 15(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3479007
  26. Falk, M., & Katz‐Gerro, T. (2016). Cultural participation in Europe: Can we identify common determinants? Journal of Cultural Economics, 40, 127–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10824-015-9242-9
  27. Habijan-Mikeš, V. (2007). Fruška Gora: Natural characteristics - fauna (in Serbian). Belgrade.
  28. Ham, S. H. (2009). Interpretation: Making a difference on purpose. Fulcrum Publishing.
  29. Ham, S. H., & Weiler, B. (2002). Interpretation as the centrepiece of sustainable wildlife tourism. In R. Harris, T. Griffin, & P. Williams (Eds.), Sustainable tourism: A global perspective (pp. 35–44). Butterworth-Heinemann.
  30. Hammitt, W. E., Backlund, E. A., & Bixler, R. D. (2006). Place bonding for recreation places: Conceptual and empirical development. Leisure Studies, 25(1), 17–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614360500098100
  31. Jayakody, D., Adams, V., Pecl, G., & Lester, E. (2024). What makes a place special? Understanding drivers and the nature of place attachment. Applied Geography, 162, Article 103177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2023.103177
  32. Karagöz, D., & Ramkissoon, H. (2025). The effect of heritagescapes on immersion and hedonia: The moderating role of visitor type. International Journal of Tourism Research, 27(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.70026
  33. Kempiak, J., Hollywood, L., Bolan, P., & McMahon-Beattie, U. (2017). The heritage tourist: An understanding of the visitor experience at heritage attractions. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 23(4), 375–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2016.1277776
  34. Knez, I., & Eliasson, I. (2017). Relationships between personal and collective place identity and well-being in mountain communities. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article 79. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00079
  35. Knez, I., Sang, Å., Gunnarsson, B., & Hedblom, M. (2018). Wellbeing in urban greenery: The role of naturalness and place identity. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 491. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00491
  36. Knudson, D., Cable, T., & Beck, L. (2016). Interpretation of cultural and natural resources (4th ed.). Sagamore Publishing.
  37. Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., & Bacon, J. (2005). Effects of place attachment on users’ perceptions of social and environmental conditions in a natural setting. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(2), 213–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2003.12.006
  38. Landon, A., Woosnam, K., Kyle, G., & Keith, S. (2020). Psychological needs satisfaction and attachment to natural landscapes. Environment and Behavior, 53(6), 661–683. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916520916255
  39. Lewicka, M. (2011). On the varieties of people’s relationships with places. Environment and Behavior, 43(5), 676–709. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916510364917
  40. Lin, C., & Lockwood, M. (2014). Forms and sources of place attachment: Evidence from two protected areas. Geoforum, 53, 74–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.02.008
  41. Ma, T., Chow, A., Cheung, L., Lee, K., & Liu, S. (2018). Impacts of tourists’ sociodemographic characteristics on the travel motivation and satisfaction: The case of protected areas in South China. Sustainability, 10(10), Article 3388. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10103388
  42. Mandal, A. (2016). Size and type of places, geographical region, satisfaction with life, age, sex and place attachment. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 47(2), 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1515/ppb-2016-0018
  43. Marković, S. B., Mijović, D., Jovanović, M., & Kovačev, N. (2001). Geoheritage sites of Fruška Gora Mountain. Protection of Nature, 53(1), 131–138.
  44. Moreno-Melgarejo, A., García-Valenzuela, L., Hilliard, I., & Pinto-Tortosa, A. (2019). Exploring relations between heritage interpretation, visitors learning experience and tourist satisfaction. Czech Journal of Tourism, 8(2), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.2478/cjot-2019-0007
  45. Moscardo, G. (1996). Mindful visitors: Heritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(2), 376–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(95)00068-2
  46. Nowacki, M. (2021). Heritage interpretation and sustainable development: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 13(8), Article 4383. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084383
  47. Nyaupane, P. (2023). Heritage interpretation techniques and its epistemology of the world heritage site, Lumbini, birth place of Lord Buddha. Nepalese Culture, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.3126/nc.v16i1.54124
  48. Ogden, C. K., & Richards, I. A. (1923). The meaning of meaning: A study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.
  49. Packer, J., & Ballantyne, R. (2016). Conceptualizing the visitor experience: A review of research in museums and heritage sites. Visitor Studies, 19(2), 134–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/10645578.2016.1235480
  50. Pasaco-González, B., Campón-Cerro, A., Moreno-Lobato, A., & Sánchez-Vargas, E. (2023). The role of demographics and previous experience in tourists’ experiential perceptions. Sustainability, 15(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043768
  51. Petrović, M. D., Vasiljević, Dj. A., Vujičić, M. D., Hose, T. A., Marković, S. B., & Lukić, T. (2013). Global geopark and candidate - Comparative analysis of Papuk Mountain Geopark (Croatia) and Fruška Gora Mountain (Serbia) by using GAM model. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences, 8(1), 105–116.
  52. Ramkissoon, H., Smith, L. D. G., & Weiler, B. (2013). Testing the dimensionality of place attachment and its relationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviours: A structural equation modelling approach. Tourism Management, 36, 552–566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.09.003
  53. Subiza-Pérez, M., Vozmediano, L., & Juan, C. (2020). Green and blue settings as providers of mental health ecosystem services: Comparing urban beaches and parks and building a predictive model of psychological restoration. Landscape and Urban Planning, 204, Article 103926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103926
  54. Tešin, A., Dragin, A., Ladičorbić, M., Jovanović, T., Zadel, Z., Surla, T., Košić, K., Amezcua-Ogáyar, J., Calahorro-López, A., Kuzman, B., & Stojanović, V. (2024). Quality of life and attachments to rural settlements: The basis for regeneration and socio-economic sustainability. Land, 13(9), Article 1364. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13091364
  55. Tilden, F. (1977). Interpreting our heritage (3rd ed.). The University of North Carolina Press. (Original work published 1957)
  56. Tisdell, C., & Wilson, C. (2002). Ecotourism for the survival of biodiversity and sustainable development: Economic and ecological perspectives. Tourism Economics, 8(2), 145–161. https://doi.org/10.5367/000000002101298034
  57. Tubb, K. N. (2003). An evaluation of the effectiveness of interpretation within Dartmoor National Park in reaching the goals of sustainable tourism development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(6), 476–498. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669580308667217
  58. Wang, M., Li, Y., Ruan, W., Zhang, S., Li, R., & Zhang, K. (2024). To understand or to touch? Evoking tourists’ cultural preservation commitment through heritage tourism interpretation. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 33, 168–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2024.2316299
  59. Williams, D. R., & Vaske, J. J. (2003). The measurement of place attachment: Validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science, 49(6), 830–840. https://doi.org/10.1093/forestscience/49.6.830
  60. Wyles, K., White, M., Hattam, C., Pahl, S., King, H., & Austen, M. (2019). Are some natural environments more psychologically beneficial than others? The importance of type and quality on connectedness to nature and psychological restoration. Environment and Behavior, 51(2), 111–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517738312
  61. Wynveen, C., Schneider, I., Arnberger, A., Cottrell, S., & Von Ruschkowski, E. (2020). Integrating place attachment into management frameworks: Exploring place attachment across the Recreation Opportunity Spectrum. Environmental Management, 66, 248–262. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-020-01292-7
  62. Zaus, J. (2025). Interpreting for all minds: Synthesising practices for cognitively inclusive heritage interpretation. Matkailututkimus, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.33351/mt.163308
  63. Zhang, Y., Papp-Váry, Á., & Szabó, Z. (2024). Demographic influences on digital service perceptions and satisfaction at World Heritage Sites in Chinese coastal cities: An empirical analysis. Journal of Infrastructure, Policy and Development, 8(11). https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i11.8604

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.