Suchergebnisse

This article offers a new approach to evaluating the significance of cross-border tourism for residents of the border region of Karelia amid COVID-19 restrictions. The work draws on data of a municipal-level survey of the region's population (575 people), conducted by the author in collaboration with Dr Ekaterina Shlapeko in 2021. Analysis of the survey results has confirmed the customariness of cross-border tourist mobility for the Karelians and the essential role it plays in their lives. These are manifested in regular trips to the neighbouring state, frequent contacts with Finnish travellers, marked preferences and a network of contacts with Finnish residents and organisations. The COVID-19 restrictions affected the routines of the residents of the Karelian borderlands more severely than those of people living in the inner municipalities or the regional capital. The findings of the study provide a comprehensive picture of the significance of cross-border tourist mobility (border tourism) and point to spatial differences in the perception of the study phenomenon by the residents of border, interior and urban municipalities. When applied in practice, the proposed approach gives an opportunity to widen the range of possible administrative decisions and can serve as a tool of regional economic policy on tourism.

This article considers international projects as a factor in building and developing transboundary tourism-and-recreation regions. The Karelian part of the Russian-Finnish border and the adjoining areas of Russia and Finland were the model site for the study. The research aims to measure the contribution of international projects run in 1990-2020 to transboundary region building in the Karelian borderlands. The analysis of 80 international municipal projects shows that they gave a boost to region building and development in the study area. Common trends and specific features of international projects carried out in Karelian municipalities have been identified in the context of transboundary tourism-and-recreation region building. The findings add to a comprehensive picture of how international tourism projects may forward the building and development of transboundary tourism-and-recreation regions. The results of the study can be used in research into international cooperation and tourism. The proposed approach may serve as a tool of a regional economic policy on tourism and thus broaden the scope of possible managerial decisions.

Despite that fact that cross-border tourism and recreation in the Baltic Sea Region have been extensively studied, there are still areas, which require further research. The aim of this article is to identify regions having active cross-border tourism and recreation in the adjacent territories of Finland and the Republic of Karelia. The authors propose to use an indicator characterizing the volume of incoming tourist flows. The number of tourists is not only indicative of the development of cross-border tourism and recreation; it is also one of the main criteria for determining the degree of the formation of cross-border regions. Using the statistics for Finland, the authors analyzed the geography of tourism in Finland's border areas and identified the degree of intensity of cross-border tourism exchange between the neighbouring administrative units of the two countries. The article also examines other tendencies indicative of the formation and development of cross-border tourism and recreation regions along the Russian-Finnish border. The authors identified three cross-border tourism and recreation regions of different development levels: South Karelia, Middle Karelia and North Karelia. South Karelia is a mesoregion with the average annual tourist exchange of about 100 thousand people, which is the average level of tourism development. The total volume of cross-border tourist flows from and to other cross-border tourist and recreation regions is about 30 thousand people per year. Middle Karelia microregion ranks second and is followed by the North Karelian microregion. The authors conclude that these two microregions are at the initial stage of their formation and, therefore, can be regarded as parts of one microregion - Russian-Finnish Northern microregion.