随着我国大众旅游和自驾游的蓬勃发展，自驾车房车营地作为交通与旅游融合的新 型业态，满足了日益增长的旅游新需求，具有广阔发展前景。国外自驾车房车营地发展 始于20世纪，研究成果丰硕；我国自驾车房车营地在21世纪才开始起步，研究相对滞 后且成果极少。自驾车房车营地的合理选址是营地建设和运营能否成功的关键因素，对 促进区域旅游产业有着重要意义。 首先，本文基于文献梳理和自驾车房车营地发展现状剖析基础上，将自驾车房车营 地类型划分为环境依托型、景区依托型、交通依托型、项目依托型和休闲度假型，依据 典型性、代表性和多样性选取了10个营地作为典型案例，初步确定了47个初始选址影 响因子，运用德尔菲法进行专家访谈和三轮问卷发放，根据界值法对因子进行删除，再 使用自相关分析法和差异系数法进行因子筛选，通过以上三轮筛选最终确定了20个影 响因子，构建了自驾车房车营地选址评价体系。 其次，基于主观评价和客观熵值相结合，运用AHP法和熵值系数法计算各因子权 重，AHP模型构建三级判断矩阵，邀请30位专家进行评分，计算各因子主观权重；熵 值系数法使用10个案例营地的因子数据构建评价矩阵，利用信息熵计算各因子的客观 权重；将两个方法相结合确定各因子的最终权重。 最后，基于构建的自驾车房车营地选址评价体系和各因子权重值，运用综合分值法 对10个自驾车房车营地案例进行综合评价，为我国自驾车房车营地选址提出优化策略。 研究结果显示：（1）营地选址影响因子里交通因素权重值最高，市场因素中城市经济发 展水平和旅游资源条件，交通因素中交通基础设施和主要交通干道，自然因素中的生态 环境质量，社会因素中地方政策权重值相对较大；（2）景区依托型和交通依托型自驾车 房车营地类型选址较为理想；其次为休闲度假型和环境依托型；项目依托型得分较低。 本研究构建了自驾车房车营地选址评价体系，填补了我国自驾车房车营地选址研究 的空白和不足，提出了营地选址优化路径，为我国自驾车房车营地的科学发展奠定了良 好基矗 关键词：自驾车房车营地，营地类型，选址，影响因子 II Abstract With the vigorous development of mass tourism and self-driving tours in China, self- driving caravan camps, as a new format for the integration of transportation and tourism, have met the growing demand for tourism and have broad development prospects. The development of foreign self-driving caravan camps started in the 20th century, and the research achievements are abundant; China's self-driving caravan camps only started in the 21st century, and the research is relatively lagging with few results. The reasonable location of self-driving caravan camps is a key factor for the success of camp construction and operation, and it is of great significance for promoting the regional tourism industry. First of all, based on the literature review and analysis of the development status of self- driving RV camps, this paper divides the types of self-driving RV camps into environment- dependent, scenic spot-dependent, traffic-dependent, project-dependent, and leisure-based, 10 camps were selected as typical cases and 47 initial site selection impact factors were initially determined. Expert interviews and three rounds of questionnaires were distributed using the Delphi method. Factors were deleted according to the boundary value method, and then autocorrelation was used. The analysis method and the difference coefficient method were used for factor selection. Through the above three rounds of selection, 20 impact factors were finally determined, and a self-driving motorhome campsite selection evaluation system was constructed. Secondly, based on the combination of subjective evaluation and objective entropy value, AHP method and entropy value coefficient method are used to calculate the weight of each factor. The AHP model constructs a three-level judgment matrix, and invites 30 experts to score and calculate the subjective weight of each factor; entropy coefficient method use the factor data of 10 case camps to construct an evaluation matrix, and use the information entropy to calculate the objective weight of each factor; combine the two methods to determine the final weight of each factor. Finally, based on the constructed self-driving RV camp site selection evaluation system and the weight value of each factor, a comprehensive evaluation method was used to comprehensively evaluate 10 self-driving RV camp sites, and an optimization strategy was proposed for the location selection of self-driving RV camp sites in China. The results of the study show that: (1) The weighting value of the traffic factor is the highest among the influencing factors of campsite location, the level of urban economic development and tourism III resource conditions among market factors, the transportation infrastructure and main traffic arteries among transportation factors, and the ecological environment quality among natural factors, among the social factors, the local policy weight value is relatively large; (2) The site- dependent and traffic-dependent self-driving motorhome campsites are ideal for site selection; followed by the leisure and holiday-based and environment-based types; the project-based type has a low score. This study builds a self-driving RV camp site selection evaluation system, fills the gaps and deficiencies in the research of self-driving RV camp site selection, and proposes an optimized route for camp site selection. Key words： Self-driving car camp, Camp type, Site selection, Impact factor IV 目 录 第一章 绪论 . 1 1.1 研究背景及意义 ............. 1 1.1.1 研究背景 .............. 1 1.1.2 研究意义 .............. 2 1.2 文献综述 ......................... 3 1.2.1 国外研究综述 ...... 3 1.2.2 国内研究综述 ...... 5 1.3 研究框架 ......................... 6 1.3.1 研究内容 .............. 6 1.3.2 研究方法 .............. 7 1.3.3 研究路线 .............. 8 第二章 自驾车房车营地概述 .... 9 2.1 理论基础 ......................... 9 2.1.1 区位理论 .............. 9 2.1.2 中心地理论 .......... 9 2.1.3 可持续发展理论 .. 9 2.2 概念界定 ......................... 9 2.2.1 自驾游 .................. 9 2.2.2 自驾车房车营地 10 2.3 自驾游与自驾车房车营地的关系 .............. 10 2.4 国内外自驾车房车营地发展现状及发展趋势 ......................... 11 2.4.1 国外自驾车房车营地发展现状 ....... 11 2.4.2 国内自驾车房车营地发展现状 ....... 12 2.4.3 国内自驾车房车营地发展趋势 ....... 12 2.5 自驾车房车营地的类型 .............................. 13 2.5.1 环境依托型 ........ 13 2.5.2 景区依托型 ........ 13 2.5.3 交通依托型 ........ 14 V 2.5.4 项目依托型 ....... 14 2.5.5 休闲度假型 ....... 14 2.6 自驾车房车营地的开发模式 ..................... 14 2.6.1 客源地开发模式 .............................. 14 2.6.2 既有景区开发模式 .......................... 14 2.6.3 旅游目的地开发模式 ...................... 14 2.7 自驾车房车营地的运营模式 ..................... 15 2.7.1 单体运营 ........... 15 2.7.2 联合运营 ........... 15 2.7.3 品牌连锁 ........... 15 2.7.4 其他模式 ........... 15 2.8 本章小结 ...................... 16 第三章 自驾车房车营地选址关键影响因子分析 17 3.1 研究案例选择 .............. 17 3.2 关键影响因子筛选识别 ............................. 18 3.3 初始关键影响因子清单 ............................. 21 3.3.1 筛选原则 ........... 21 3.3.2 初始影响因子清单 .......................... 21 3.4 德尔菲法影响因子筛选 ............................. 24 3.5 自相关分析法影响因子筛选 ..................... 31 3.6 差异系数法影响因子筛选 ......................... 32 3.7 定量检验 ...................... 35 3.8 本章小结 ...................... 36 第四章 自驾车房车营地选址评价体系构建 ........ 38 4.1 指标数据处理 .............. 38 4.1.1 基础数据 ........... 38 4.1.2 数据的标准化处理 .......................... 39 4.2 指标权重计算 .............. 40 4.2.1 AHP法影响因子权重的确定 .......... 40 4.2.2 熵权法影响因子权重的确定 .......... 44 VI 4.2.3 最终影响因子权重的确定 ............... 46 4.3 案例营地评价 ............... 47 4.4 选址优化策略 ............... 50 4.5 本章小结 ....................... 50 第五章 结论与展望 .................. 51 5.1 结论 51 5.2 研究不足与展望 ........... 52