A Path-Analysis Study on the Relationship between World Heritage Conservation and Community Mobility Characteristics: The Case of Suwon Hwaseong

Seung-Woo Han; Jae-Heon Choi

doi:10.22776/kgs.2026.61.1.120

All Issue

2026 Vol.61, Issue 1 Preview Page Next Page

Research Article

A Path-Analysis Study on the Relationship between World Heritage Conservation and Community Mobility Characteristics: The Case of Suwon Hwaseong 경로분석을 통한 세계유산 보존과 공동체 모빌리티 특성 간 관계 연구 - 수원화성을 사례로-

28 February 2026. pp. 120-133

PDF XML

Abstract

Using Suwon Hwaseong as a case study, this study examines the relationship between community mobility characteristics and World Heritage conservation. We applied path analysis to survey data collected from residents and visitors. The results show that, despite group-level differences, individual mobility capability enhances perceptions of heritage value, which in turn exerts both direct and indirect effects on World Heritage conservation. In particular, residents’ perceived livability and visitor satisfaction mediated the effect of mobility capability on conservation. These findings suggest that, even when the causal mechanisms of mobility differ across groups, mobility-supportive conditions generally promote community participation in conservation. Accordingly, sustainable heritage conservation—premised on community participation—requires policies that reflect diverse individual mobility needs and provide compensatory support for those with relatively limited capability. Finally, this study underscores the need for a behavioral approach to heritage management that accounts for community heterogeneity and diversity.

Keywords

World Heritage conservation

path analysis

behavioral approach

mobility

livability

visitor satisfaction

본 연구는 수원화성을 사례로 공동체 모빌리티 특성과 세계유산 보존의 관계를 분석하였다. 주민과 방문객을 대상으로 수집한 설문자료에 경로분석을 적용한 결과, 집단별 차이는 존재하나 개인의 모빌리티 역량이 유산가치 인식을 제고함으로써 세계유산 보존에 직･간접적으로 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 특히 주민의 거주적합성과 방문객의 방문만족은 모빌리티 역량의 효과가 세계유산 보존으로 이어지는 과정에서 매개변수로 작동하였다. 이는 모빌리티의 인과 메커니즘이 집단에 따라 상이하게 나타나더라도, 전반적으로 이동에 유리한 조건이 공동체의 보존 참여를 촉진할 수 있음을 시사한다. 따라서 지속가능한 유산보존을 위해서는 공동체 참여를 전제로 개인의 다양한 모빌리티 수요를 반영하고, 상대적으로 낮은 역량을 보완하는 정책적 지원을 마련할 필요가 있다. 나아가 본 연구는 유산관리에서 공동체의 이질성과 다양성을 고려하는 행태주의적 접근의 필요성을 강조한다.

키워드

세계유산 보존

경로분석

행태주의

모빌리티

거주적합성

방문만족

References

강현수･이희상 역, 2014, 모빌리티, 아카넷, 파주 (Urry, J., 2007, Mobilities, Polity Press, Cambridge).

경제･인문사회연구회, 2023, 디지털 전환 시대 모빌리티 서비스의 고령자 디지털 격차 진당 및 해소방안 실증연구, 협동연구총서 23-45-01.

구동회･박영민 역, 1994, 포스트모더니티의 조건, 한울, 파주 (Harvey, D., 1989, The Condition of Postmodernity, Basil Blackwell, Oxford).

김남조･안지현, 2018, “관광 젠트리피케이션 현상에 대한 인과순환 구조와 정책지렛대 탐색: 북촌일대를 중심으로,” 관광학연구, 42(1), 91-116.

10.17086/JTS.2018.42.1.91.116

문화재청, 2022, 문화재관리현황: 세계유산 관람객 현황.

박경환･류연택･정현주･이용균 역, 2012, 도시사회지리학의 이해(제6판), 시그마프레스, 서울 (Knox, P. and Pinch, S., 2010, Urban Social Geography: An Introduction, 6th ed., Pearson Education, London).

박미선, 2021, 도시재생사업이 세계유산지역 주민의 유산보호인식에 미치는 영향 연구: 수원시 행궁동 도시재생사업을 중심으로, 서울시립대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.

박지원, 2022, 관광지 만족도를 평가하는 관광지 선택속성에 관한 연구: 텍스트 마이닝과 퍼지셋 질적비교분석의 활용, 세종대학교 박사학위논문.

배병렬, 2021, Amos 27 구조방정식모델링, 청람, 서울.

심준섭, 2013, 구조방정식모형: 이해와 활용, 광암문화사, 서울.

우종필, 2014, 우종필 교수의 구조방정식모형 오해와 편견, 한나래출판사, 서울.

우종필, 2022, 우종필 교수의 구조방정식모형 개념과 이해 개정판, 한나래출판사, 서울.

윤신희, 2018, “모빌리티스 주요구성요인의 타당성 검증,” 대한지리학회지, 53(2), 209-228.

10.22776/kgs.2018.53.2.209

윤신희･노시학, 2016, “모빌리티스(Mobilities) 개념의 주요 구성요소 및 측정변수 분석,” 국토지리학회지, 50(4), 503-511.

이용균, 2015, “모빌리티의 구성과 실천에 대한 지리학적 탐색,” 한국도시지리학회지, 18(3), 147-159.

전선민･윤정우･박지용･정주철, 2021, “도시 리버빌리티(Livability) 측정 지표 도출에 관한 연구: 주제범위 문헌고찰을 통해,” 한국방재학회논문집, 21(5), 281-292.

조철호, 2014, SPSS/AMOS 활용 구조방정식모형 논문통계분석(제3판), 청람, 서울.

최서희･백일순･Bui, Thi My Hang, 2023, “외국인 이주자의 모빌리티 자본과 네트워크 자본의 특성: 한국 내 베트남 이주자를 사례로,” 대한지리학회지, 58(3), 217-235.

최일만 역, 2019, 모빌리티 이론, 앨피, 서울 (Adey, P., 2017, Mobility, Routledge, London).

최재헌, 2005, “세계화 시대의 지역과 지역정체성에 대한 개념적 이해,” 한국도시지리학회지, 8(2), 1-17.

최재헌, 2022, 한국의 세계유산과 지역성, 트레블그라픽스, 서울.

최지연, 2019, 지역활성화 과정에서의 갈등 연구: 행궁동 지역을 중심으로, 수원시정연구원, 수원.

한승우, 2025, 경로분석을 통한 세계유산 보존과 공동체 모빌리티의 관계성 연구: 수원화성을 사례로, 건국대학교 박사학위논문.

AbouBakr, D. and ElSerafi, T., 2023, City growth challenges as a dilemma between urban mobility and livability: A case study of Heliopolis, Civil Engineering and Architecture, 11(4), 1795-1813.

10.13189/cea.2023.110411

Adey, P., 2006, If mobility is everything then it is nothing: Towards a relational politics of (im)mobilities, Mobilities, 1(1), 75-94.

10.1080/17450100500489080

Alam, K., 2013, Factors affecting public participation in river ecosystem restoration: Using the contingent valuation method, The Journal of Developing Areas, 47(1), 223-240.

10.1353/jda.2013.0008

Berger, G., Feindt, P. H., Holden, E. and Rubik, F., 2014, Sustainable mobility: Challenges for a complex transition, Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 16(3), 303-320.

10.1080/1523908X.2014.954077

Beyazit, E., 2011, Evaluating social justice in transport: Lessons to be learned from the capability approach, Transport Reviews, 31(1), 117-134.

10.1080/01441647.2010.504900

Buckley, R., Shekari, F., Mohammadi, Z., Azizi, F. and Ziaee, M., 2020, World heritage tourism triggers urban–rural reverse migration and social change, Journal of Travel Research, 59(3), 559-572.

10.1177/0047287519853048

Caust, J. and Vecco, M., 2017, Is UNESCO World Heritage recognition a blessing or burden? Evidence from developing Asian countries, Journal of Cultural Heritage, 27, 1-9.

10.1016/j.culher.2017.02.004

Cervero, R., 2009, Transport infrastructure and global competitiveness: Balancing mobility and livability, The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 626(1), 210-225.

10.1177/0002716209344171

Chow, P. T., Mok, M. T. and Cheung, S. O., 2012, Living in a heritage: Sense of pride and inconvenience, in Proceedings of the Management of Construction: Research to Practice(MCrp), Montreal, Canada, 25, June,120-131.

Cresswell, T., 2001, The production of mobilities, New Formations, 43, 11-25.

Dong, X., Zhang, J., Zhi, R., Zhong, S. E. and Li, M., 2011, Measuring recreational value of world heritage sites based on contingent valuation method: A case study of Jiuzhaigou, Chinese Geographical Science, 21, 119-128.

10.1007/s11769-011-0445-5

Elmahdy, N. M., Kamel, R. R. and Nasreldin, R., 2021, Contextualizing urban liveability indicators to create liveable neighbourhoods, International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology, 14(1), 56-68.

Foltýnová, H. B., Vejchodská, E., Rybová, K. and Květoň, V., 2020, Sustainable urban mobility: One definition, different stakeholders’ opinions, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 87, 102465.

10.1016/j.trd.2020.102465

Hidayati, I., Tan, W. and Yamu, C., 2021, Conceptualizing mobility inequality: Mobility and accessibility for the marginalized, Journal of Planning Literature, 36(4), 492-507.

10.1177/08854122211012898

Jang, H. and Mennis, J., 2021, The role of local communities and well-being in UNESCO World Heritage site conservation: An analysis of the operational guidelines, 1994-2019, Sustainability, 13, 7144.

10.3390/su13137144

Jang, S. S. and Feng, R., 2007, Temporal destination revisit intention: The effects of novelty seeking and satisfaction, Tourism Management, 28(2), 580-590.

10.1016/j.tourman.2006.04.024

Ji, S., Choi, Y., Lee, C. K. and Mjelde, J. W., 2018, Comparing willingness-to-pay between residents and non-residents using a contingent valuation method: Case of the Grand Canal in China, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 23(1), 79-91.

10.1080/10941665.2017.1399919

Jojic, S., 2018, City branding and the tourist gaze: City branding for tourism development, European Journal of Social Science Education and Research, 5(3), 150-160.

10.2478/ejser-2018-0066

Kalman, H., 2014, Heritage Planning: Principles and Process, Routledge, London.

Kaufmann, V., 2014, Mobility as a tool for sociology, Sociologica, 1, 1-17.

Kaufmann, V., Bergman, M. M. and Joye, D., 2004, Motility: Mobility as capital, International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(4), 745-756.

10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00549.x

Leask, A. and Fyall, A., 2006, Managing World Heritage Sites, Routledge, London.

10.4324/9780080461755

Liang, W., Ahmad, Y. and Mohidin, H. H. B., 2023a, Spatial pattern and transportation accessibility of architectural heritage in Chengdu, China, International Journal of Geoinformatics, 19(1), 67-81.

10.52939/ijg.v19i1.2503

Liang, W., Ahmad, Y. and Mohidin, H. H. B., 2023b, The development of the concept of architectural heritage conservation and its inspiration, Built Heritage, 7(1), 21.

10.1186/s43238-023-00103-2

López-Gay, A., Cocola-Gant, A. and Russo, A., 2020, Urban tourism and population change: Gentrification in the age of mobilities, Population, Space and Place, 27(1), e2380.

10.1002/psp.2380

Louro, A., da Costa, N. M. and da Costa, E. M., 2021, From livable communities to livable metropolis: Challenges for urban mobility in Lisbon metropolitan area (Portugal), International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(7), 3525.

10.3390/ijerph1807352533805336PMC8037474

Martens, K., 2020, A People-centred Approach to Accessibility, International Transport Forum Discussion Papers, No. 2020/24, OECD Publishing, Paris.

Martin, J. C., Román, C., Moreira, P., Moreno, R. and Oyarce, F., 2021, Does the access transport mode affect visitors’ satisfaction in a World Heritage City? The case of Valparaiso, Chile, Journal of Transport Geography, 91, 102969.

10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.102969

Mazlan, I. D., Shi, B. S. and Wai, L. C., 2023, Rethinking conservation of Malaysia World Heritage Site livability: The case of Chew Jetty, Penang, in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1205(1), 012083.

10.1088/1755-1315/1205/1/012083

Mousavi, S. N., 2013, Livability in historic urban quarters: Case study of Walled City of Famagusta, Master’s thesis, Eastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta.

OpenAI, 2026, ChatGPT (GPT-5.2), Large Language Model (LLM), https://chatgpt.com, accessed 22 February 2026. Used for proofreading of the English abstract and for sentence editing and translation in the Korean manuscript. All interpretations, revisions, and final validations were conducted by the author.

Parahoo, S. K., Harvey, H. L. and Radi, G. Y. A., 2014, Satisfaction of tourists with public transport: An empirical investigation in Dubai, Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 31(8), 1004-1017.

10.1080/10548408.2014.890158

Ramires, A., Brandao, F. and Sousa, A. C., 2018, Motivation-based cluster analysis of international tourists visiting a World Heritage City: The case of Porto, Portugal, Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 8, 49-60.

10.1016/j.jdmm.2016.12.001

Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Jaafar, M., Ahmad, A. G. and Barghi, R., 2017, Community participation in World Heritage Site conservation and tourism development, Tourism Management, 58, 142-153.

10.1016/j.tourman.2016.10.016

Rastegar, Z. R., Zarezadeh, Z. and Gretzel, U., 2021, World heritage and social justice: Insights from the inscription of Yazd, Iran, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 29(2-3), 521-540.

10.1080/09669582.2020.1782925

Sanz-Blas, S., Buzova, D. and Schlesinger, W., 2019, The sustainability of cruise tourism onshore: The impact of crowding on visitors’ satisfaction, Sustainability, 11(6), 1510.

10.3390/su11061510

Scarbrough, E., 2021, Are Archaeological parks the new amusement parks? UNESCO World Heritage status and tourism, in Killin, A. and Allen-Hermanson, S. (eds.), Explorations in Archaeology and Philosophy, Springer, Cham.

10.1007/978-3-030-61052-4_13

Seth, S. and Dutta, S., 2023, Conserving heritage and historical legacy as a tool for enhancement of liveability: The case of Chowk, Lucknow, Future is Urban: Livability, Resilience & Resource Conservation, Routledge, London.

10.4324/9781003342441-10

Su, M. M. and Wall, G., 2016, A comparison of tourists’ and residents’ uses of the Temple of Heaven World Heritage Site, China, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 21(8), 905-930.

10.1080/10941665.2015.1084346

Tennakoon, T. M. M. P. and Kulatunga, U., 2019, Understanding liveability: Related concepts and definitions, in Sandanayake, Y. G., Gunatilake, S. and Waidyasekara, A. (eds.), Proceedings of the 8th World Construction Symposium, Colombo, Sri Lanka, 8-10 November, 578-587.

10.31705/WCS.2019.57

UNESCO, 2025, Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the World Heritage Convention, Paris.

Wang, X., Zhang, J., Gu, C. and Zhen, F., 2009, Examining antecedents and consequences of tourist satisfaction: A structural modeling approach, Tsinghua Science and Technology, 14(3), 397-406.

10.1016/S1007-0214(09)70057-4

World Heritage Centre, http://whc.unesco.org, accessed 1 April 2025.

World Heritage Committee, 1997, Inscription: Hwasong Fortress, https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/2890, accessed 1 April 2025.

Yang, Y., Wang, Z., Shen, H. and Jiang, N., 2023, The impact of emotional experience on tourists’ cultural identity and behavior in the cultural heritage tourism context: An empirical study on Dunhuang Mogao Grottoes, Sustainability, 15(11), 8823.

10.3390/su15118823

Zhang, H., Ge, Q., An, T. G. and Cho, T. Y., 2018, A study on the relationship of authenticity, tourist experience, tourist satisfaction, and acculturation of world cultural heritage, Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, 9(8), 759-765.

10.5958/0976-5506.2018.00825.2

Zhang, X., 2022, Linking people’s mobility and place livability: Implications for rural communities, Economic Development Quarterly, 36(3), 149-159.

10.1177/08912424211045916

Information

Publisher :The Korean Geographical Society
Publisher(Ko) :대한지리학회
Journal Title :Journal of the Korean Geographical Society
Journal Title(Ko) :대한지리학회지
Volume : 61
No :1
Pages :120-133
Received Date : 2026-01-16
Revised Date : 2026-02-24
Accepted Date : 2026-02-25
DOI :https://doi.org/10.22776/kgs.2026.61.1.120

Journal of the Korean Geographical Society ISSN:1225-6633(Print) 대한지리학회지

All Issue