Tourism and Arctic Observation Systems : exploring the relationships

The Arctic is affected by global environmental change and also by diverse interests from many economic sectors and industries. Over the last decade, various actors have attempted to explore the options for setting up integrated and comprehensive trans-boundary systems for monitoring and observing these impacts. These Arctic Observation Systems (AOS) contribute to the planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of environmental change and responsible social and economic development in the Arctic. The aim of this article is to identify the two-way relationship between AOS and tourism. On the one hand, tourism activities account for diverse changes across a broad spectrum of impact fields. On the other hand, due to its multiple and diverse agents and far-reaching activities, tourism is also well-positioned to collect observational data and participate as an actor in monitoring activities. To accomplish our goals, we provide an inventory of tourism-embedded issues and concerns of interest to AOS from a range of destinations in the circumpolar Arctic region, including Alaska, Arctic Canada, Iceland, Svalbard, the mainland European Arctic and Russia. The article also draws comparisons with the situation in Antarctica. On the basis of a collective analysis provided by members of the International Polar Tourism Research Network from across the polar regions, we conclude that the potential role for tourism in the development and implementation of AOS is significant and has been overlooked.

Tourism and arctic observation systems : Exploring the relationships

The Arctic is affected by global environmental change and also by diverse interests from many economic sectors and industries. Over the last decade, various actors have attempted to explore the options for setting up integrated and comprehensive trans-boundary systems for monitoring and observing these impacts. These Arctic Observation Systems (AOS) contribute to the planning, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of environmental change and responsible social and economic development in the Arctic. The aim of this article is to identify the two-way relationship between AOS and tourism. On the one hand, tourism activities account for diverse changes across a broad spectrum of impact fields. On the other hand, due to its multiple and diverse agents and far-reaching activities, tourism is also well-positioned to collect observational data and participate as an actor in monitoring activities. To accomplish our goals, we provide an inventory of tourism-embedded issues and concerns of interest to AOS from a range of destinations in the circumpolar Arctic region, including Alaska, Arctic Canada, Iceland, Svalbard, the mainland European Arctic and Russia. The article also draws comparisons with the situation in Antarctica. On the basis of a collective analysis provided by members of the International Polar Tourism Research Network from across the polar regions, we conclude that the potential role for tourism in the development and implementation of AOS is significant and has been overlooked.

Geoprocessing journey-to-work data : delineating commuting regions in Dalarna, Sweden

Delineation of commuting regions has always been based on statistical units, often municipalities or wards. However, using these units has certain disadvantages as their land areas differ considerably. Much information is lost in the larger spatial base units and distortions in self-containment values, the main criterion in rule-based delineation procedures, occur. Alternatively, one can start from relatively small standard size units such as hexagons. In this way, much greater detail in spatial patterns is obtained. In this paper, regions are built by means of intrazonal maximization (Intramax) on the basis of hexagons. The use of geoprocessing tools, specifically developed for the processing ofcommuting data, speeds up processing time considerably. The results of the Intramax analysis are evaluated with travel-to-work area constraints, and comparisons are made with commuting fields, accessibility to employment, commuting flow density and network commuting flow size. From selected steps in the regionalization process, a hierarchy of nested commuting regions emerges, revealing the complexity of commuting patterns.