Vol. 9, No. 1 & 2, 2016 Indian Institute of Tourism and ... · Multi-Stakeholder Perceptions about...

Intern

ation

al Jou

rnal o

f To

urism

and

Trav

el

2016

ISSN: 0974-2603Vol. 9, No. 1 & 2, 2016

International Journal of

Tourism and Travel

Tourism and Travel

Vo

lum

e 9 Issue 1&

2Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management(An Organization of Ministry of Tourism, Government of India)

Govindpuri, Gwalior - 474 011 (M.P.)

Website: www.iittm.org

In this Issue

ISSN: 0974-2603Vol. 9, No. 1 & 2, 2016


Tourism and Travel

Tourism and Travel

Journal in association with

Ph: 011-28082485, 011-47044510

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.publishingindia.com

Publishing India Group

1. Determinants of Social Media Use Across Tourist Lifecycle Phases - An Empirical Investigation of Tourist Motives Ansted Iype Joseph, S. Victor Anand Kumar

2. Impact of Healthcare Utilities and Law & Order Conditions on Tourism: A Study on Community-based Tourism in North East India Mridul Dutta and Nayan Barua

3. Multi-Stakeholder Perceptions about Sustainable Tourism in Goa: A Structural Equation Modeling Carmelita D' Mello, Santana Fernandes, Friedrich M. Zimmermann, Subhash Kizhakanveatil Bhaskaran Pillai, Jacob Ganef Pah

4. Rural Tourism in India: Relevance, Prospects and Promotional Strategies Shikha Kapur

5. Potential of Rural Tourism in India - A Synoptic View Ridhi Sharma

ADVISORY BOARD

Professor Chris CooperDirector, Christel deHaan Tourism and Travel Research lnstituteUnited Kingdom

Professor Brian KingHead of School of Hospitality, Tourism and Marketing, Victoria UniversityAustralia

Professor C. Michael HallUniversity of Canterbury, Christchurch,New Zealand

Professor Nimit Chowdhary Nodal Officer, Indian Institute of Tourism & Travel Management, Noida, India

Dr. T.V. SinghEditor-in-Chief, Tourism Recreation ResearchIndia

Professor Noel B. Salazar Cultural Mobilities Research (CuMoRe), University of Leuven, Belgium

Professor Ghazali Bin Musa Department of Business Strategy and Policy, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Professor Larry Dwyer Honourary Professor, School of Marketing, University of Sydney, Australia

Dr. R.K. BhatnagarAddnl. Director General, Ministry of Tourism, Govt. of India

EDITORIAL BOARD

Editor-in-chiefProf. Sandeep Kulshreshtha

EditorDr. Sutheeshna Babu. S

Deputy EditorsDr. Charu Sheela Yadav

Sanjeev Reddy CKN. Subramaniam

Dr. Jeet DograShailesh Kumar

l.J. Tourism and Travel (IJT&T) is the bi-annual international journal of lndian lnstitute of Tourism and Travel Management (IITTM). Objective of this journal is to create value for enterprises and organisations in tourism, travel and related sectors and those committed to support them- policy makers, intervention agencies, researchers and academics, by establishing a platform for learning through sharing from experience, dialogue, creativity and imagination. Every issue of the journal many include contributions based on research, policy issues, conceptual models, reviews, case studies, view points, best practices, book reviews, conference reviews, etc. Contributors from all over are invited to share their ideas, knowledge, and experience through this platform. Authors and audiences may contact the editorial team at:

I.J. Tourism and TravelResearch Unit

Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management (IITTM)Govindpuri

Gwalior 474011 MP INDIAFax.: +91-751-2344054

E-mail : [email protected]

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the articles carried in T&T do not reflect the opinion of Indian Institute of Travel and Tourism Management (IITTM) or the editorial team. The information in this journal in believed to be correct, but should not be treated as a substitute for detailed advice in individual situations. It is published without responsibility on part of IITTM and editorial team whether arising out of any negligence, misrepresentation or otherwise for loss occasioned to any person or organisation acting or refraining from acting as a result of any information contained herein. Claims for missing issues can be made within a period of four months of publication. Copyright©2016 Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management International Journal of Tourism and Travel is a bi-annual journal of Indian Institute of Travel and Tourism Management, Gwalior, 474O11, India. Printed and published by Director, Indian Institute of Travel and Tourism Management, Gwalior. Chief-editor: Prof. Sandeep Kulshreshtha, Indian Institute of Travel and Tourism Management, Gwalior 474011.

AdvertisementsInternational Journal of Tourism and Travel Management will accept advertisements. All advertisements are subject to approval by the Editor-in-chief. For details and rates please contact the IITTM office.

SubmissionsInternational Journal of Tourism and Travel Management publishes in the following categories of contributions- policy issues, research articles, concept papers, reviews and cases studies. Shorter contributions of 1500-3000 words are welcome in special categories of viewpoint, best practices, notes, concerns, book reviews and conference reports.

Keeping in mind the audiences, presentation should be lucid and comprehensible. Authors are requested to make it to the point without using an extravagant or ornate language. Even it the manuscript reports the findings of original research, the methodology should be presented clearly and to the extent possible, in a non-technical manner such that our readers with limited back grounds in research methods and analysis are not discouraged from reading the article. Submissions must not be restricted to mere statement of facts. A lot of importance is attached to the analysis of the issue/concept/ findings and their potential for value addition to existing body of knowledge or practice for Tourism, travel and related activities.

Preferred method of submitting manuscripts is through electronic mail to the editor. Submission should be made in Word .doc or .rtf formats. Do not disclose your identity anywhere in the paper except on the cover page.

Always indicate which category of submission you are making. Editor/ referees can suggest a change of category.While submitting electronically always mention in the subject line: Enterprise/ Author name/ first three words in the title.In case manuscript is submitted through surface mail, submit three copies it must accompany paper on CD in the desired format. Ensure that file is free of viruses. It is generally good to create a folder and one copy each inside and outside the folder.

For detailed guidelines on submission or for submission contact:

Editor

International Journal of Tourism and TravelResearch UnitIndian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management (IITTM)Govindpuri, Gwalior 4740l 1 (MP) INDIAE-mail: [email protected]

CopyrightIt is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to this journal have not been published and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. By submitting e manuscript, the authors agree that the copyright for the article is transferred to the publisher, it and when the article is accepted for publication. The copyright covers the exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute the article, including reprints, photographic reproductions, microform, electronic or other reproductions of similar nature and translations. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without permission in writing from the copyright holder.

FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK

The all-encompassing phenomenon of tourism in the New Millennium is remarkably distinct from its modernised pedigree tracing back to the 1950’s, both in its text and context. The tourism system that a fast transforming context has eventuated has been such an environment that is highly diversified and competitive, impacting not only the overall dynamics within the industry but equally on the conduct of the business of tourism itself. On the one hand, tourism is expanding and spreading geographically as never before which in the process has been giving momentum to the introduction of new destinations and experiences that a diversified spectrum of tourists are striving for. On the other, intense competition on the domain of supply and across the destinations increasingly witnessing to emergence of newer paradigms in policies and strategies as well as the momentum in entrepreneurial initiatives. Many studies have already established that increasing access to the technology as never before, particularly the mobile internet connectivity, would be a game changer especially the manner in which the production, distribution and consumption of the tourism occur.

An equally striking aspect of tourism is the transformation in the population demographics and consumer preferences. The classical population pyramid in many countries is undergoing fast changes notably an increase in proportion of the people above 60 years and that can be observed invariably across societies. This segment is adequately experienced as tourist consumers and has adequate reserve of disposable income, but when it comes to spending, they are evidently seen exercising discretion on such items of more personally rewarding encounters and experiences. Equally notable pattern is an increasing spectrum of tourists who are conscious and aware of their social and environmental footprints as well as power to create positive changes. For them, consumption in itself is a medium to express their concern towards ethical development behavior.

Modern tourism consumption is no longer conspicuous and that is becoming evident particularly in their choice of products, service providers and destinations. Indeed, there are segments of tourists now making responsible choices based on explicit demonstration by the supply-side in their adherence to the sustainable and ethical offers, and this trend is gaining fast momentum. This in turn, offers a variety of possibilities and new opportunities for varied stakeholders in the future. Already, there exists a pattern in the product development, service delivery standards and diversification of the supply offerings justifying this trend in tourism consumption.

Equally, the process of urbanization being underway is both challenge and opportunity for tourism. The earlier emerge from ‘reverse migration’ but of a different sort having. On the one hand, different motives and dispositions stemming primarily from the generation of urban dwellers who have either totally lost connects with their roots or those fearing the loss of it and hence emerge there a longing to establish and strengthen those ties. Yet another spectrum encompasses of the people desirous of ‘getting-away’ from their mundane engagements and life environments. The momentum is further pushed by those in search of temporary escape from the growing pressure and tensions of urbanism. The consistent increase in the personal income and other demand driving factors like competitive product offerings and ease of its access are the sets of drivers propelling the spread of travelers to the peripheries, and often, to unknown geographies.

As the fast growth and diversification intourism is underway, the development process is also becoming more complex and embracing. And that necessitates critical explanations especially on the manner in which newer forms of the demand and its manifestations are going to not only impact the production and consumption cycle but also on the socio-economic changes and transformation processes that tourism eventuates. However, as Graham Dann put it sometimes back, if policy makers are often accused of being insufficiently proactive towards the ever-expanding phenomenon of tourism, the same charge can also be legitimately levelled against theoreticians.

Perhaps the concern of Dann and many others on the disproportionate academic attention and the engagements to that of the magnitude of tourism as an agent of development and change could largely be attributed to the very existence of tourism as discipline of study itself. For, many scholars treat the very disciplinarity of tourism as contentious since they consider it as defying the established tenets of being a discipline. This, albeit the fact that the theories and explanations on the phenomenon of development have reached a stage where ‘there can either be as many disciplines or the very discipline can no longer be relevant’!

That said, the criticisms do merit reference primarily on account of the very nature of tourism and its existence of industrial and production structure. As can be evident, tourism continue attracting considerable attention because it is a critical global business function now impacting the economies and societies at large. For this very reason, a critical body of tourism-specific knowledge has already been created and that the scholarly engagement on the phenomenon of tourism would continue to increase in the future. The contributions in this volume hopefully would add to further understanding and explaining of the phenomenon of tourism and its developmental manifestations.

Prof. Sutheeshna Babu. SEditor

International Journal of Tourism and TravelVolume 9, Issue 1 & 2, 2016

1. Determinants of Social Media Use Across Tourist Lifecycle Phases - An Empirical Investigation of Tourist Motives

Ansted Iype Joseph, S. Victor Anand Kumar 1-10

2. Impact of Healthcare Utilities and Law & Order Conditions on Tourism: A Study on Community-based Tourism in North East India

Mridul Dutta, Nayan Barua 11-17

3. Multi-Stakeholder Perceptions about Sustainable Tourism in Goa: A Structural Equation Modeling

Carmelita D’ Mello, Santana Fernandes, Friedrich M. Zimmermann, Subhash Kizhakanveatil Bhaskaran Pillai, Jacob Ganef Pah 18-30

4. Rural Tourism in India: Relevance, Prospects and Promotional Strategies

Shikha Kapur 31-49

5. Potential of Rural Tourism in India - A Synoptic View

Ridhi Sharma 50-55

Journal is also available online at www.publishingindia.com

DETERMINANTS OF SOCIAL MEDIA USE ACROSS TOURIST LIFECYCLE PHASES - AN

EMPIRICAL INVESTIGATION OF TOURIST MOTIVES

Ansted Iype Joseph*, S. Victor Anand Kumar**

AbstractSocial media has now emerged as an essential tool for tourists looking to not just plan their next vacation but also to use it during their vacation and beyond. This paper has brought to the fore, the motives behind the use of social media as a tool by tourists during the three phases of the tourist lifecycle; Pre-trip, In-Trip and Post-trip. From the primary data collected from domestic and international tourists, the motives that influenced their use of social media across the lifecycle phases have been identified using factor analysis and the relative importance of these factors have been analysed. Knowledge and understanding of these factors will enable destination marketing organizations and other tourism providers to utilize social media as a marketing tool to influence the tourists’ travel planning.

Keywords: Tourist Lifecycle, Social Media, Travel Planning, Tourist Decision Making

INTRODUCTION

The tourism industry has been influenced by socio-technological changes such as the emergence of the Internet and the World Wide Web (Buhalis and O’Connor, 2005; Beritelli Bieger and Laesser, 2007; Buhalis and Law, 2008; Law, Leung and Buhalis, 2009). The prominence of social media has become a game changer and has transformed the way in which people interact with others and influence the choice of others. Kaplan and Haenle in (2010) describe social media as a group of Internet-based applications that are built on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated Content (UGC). Social media has allowed its users to communicate and also discover like-minded individuals and form communities based on mutual interests. This unique ability of social media has allowed it to garner multitudes of users who increasingly use it for connecting with others.

As cited by several industry reports, today’s tourists are relying more than ever on online word of mouth. The tourism and hospitality industry is leveraging social media to promote its services and to engage travellers in a variety of ways. As social media continues its meteoric rise in its

reach and influence, tourism providers cannot depend on traditional media (print, radio, TV and so on) alone to craft consumer perception of their product.

Tourists utilize the diverse social media plat forms as tools to educate themselves about destinations and influence other travellers. Tourists’ use of social media encompasses the entire journey, from pre-trip through in-trip to post-trip. Tourism marketers would be able to create strategies around social media if they better understood the motives behind social media use during each of the phases in the tourist lifecycle.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This article investigates the motives behind the use of social media by tourists in the three phases of the travellers’ travel planning process (pre-trip, during-trip, and post-trip) suggested by Engel, Blackwell, and Miniard (1990). Dasgupta (2011) has classified the ‘tourist lifecycle’ into three phases; pre-trip, trip and post-trip.

Social media has drastically changed the way individuals plan and consume travel (Gretzel and Yoo, 2008; Hudson

* Doctoral Research Scholar, Department of Management Studies, Pondicherry University, Pondicherry, India. Email: [email protected]

** Associate Professor, Department of Management Studies, Pondicherry University, Pondicherry, India. Email: [email protected]

Article can be accessed online at http://www.publishingindia.com

2 International Journal of Tourism and Travel Volume 9, Issue 1 & 2, 2016

and Thal, 2013). Litvin, Goldsmith and Pan (2008) suggested that potential tourists can rely on others’ experiences for their decision-making, due to the experiential nature of tourism products. Social media tools are used throughout the travel planning process and after holidays for sharing experiences. Influence from social media, particularly in reputational areas, will strongly affect final decisions in holiday plans (Fotis, Buhalis and Rossides, 2011). As tourism-related products and services are high-priced, high involvement, and well-differentiated in nature, travellers generally collect and review various forms of travel information early in the travel decision-making process in order to minimize the risk of making wrong decisions (Jeng and Fesenmaier, 2002).

With the rising popularity of websites that contain content that is generated by travellers, a number of scholars coined the paramount importance of social media in the research phase of the travel planning process (Cox, Burgess, Sellitto, and Buultjens, 2009; Yoo and Gretzel, 2010; Lo, McKercher, Lo, Cheung and Law, 2011; Tussyadiah, Park and Fesenmaier, 2011). Huang, Baseu, and Hsu (2010) opined that obtaining travel information appeared to be the primary motivation driving the travellers’ use of UGC and social media. During the planning stage “Looking at other consumers” comments/materials on online travel review sites’ was the most frequently used source of information (Gretzel and Yoo, 2008).

UGC, or so called electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM), is a new form of WOM that serves similar informational needs by offering non-commercial, detailed, and experiential information (Litvin, Goldsmith and Pan, 2008). It is therefore becoming a vital information source to potential tourists (Chung and Buhalis, 2008) and is seen as more trustworthy than information provided by the destination or tourism service provider; this can subsequently be considered as substitute for word of mouth (Yoo and Gretzel, 2009; Fotis, Buhalis and Rossides, 2011).Yoo and Gretzel (2011) suggested that eWOM could provide information with an access beyond the boundaries of one’s immediate social circle. Through searching the content on social media, consumers can not only collect travel information from friends and relatives who are within their social network, but also acquire more extensive information from Internet users around the world.

Thevenot (2007) added that the travel experiences and perspectives of previous consumers could be shared with others through many different formats including text, image, audio, and video. Given that the information available on social media consist of the collaborative knowledge of people from around the world in various formats, Schmallegger and Carson (2008), as well as Yoo and Gretzel (2011), noted that social media are more effective in equipping travellers with more comprehensive knowledge on a tourism product

or destination than other information sources. Consumers’ proposition to use social media or UGC on social media is still determined by several characteristics of UGC and several socio-demographic characteristics of the consumers. Burgess, Sellitto, Cox and Buultjens (2009) suggested that UGC is trustworthy since they are the real experience revealed by real people.

UGC on social media is capable of providing unprecedentedly up-to-date and diversified formats of information to travel consumers. Cox, Burgess, Sellitto and Buultjens (2009) found that UGC on social media was mainly used at the information search stage of travel planning. Studies have suggested that during the trip, travellers engaged in more non-travel related pursuits on social media such as staying in contact with friends and to a lesser extent to obtain information related to their holiday (Fotis, Buhalis and Rossides, 2011). Social media sites are no longer static but have become collaborative and interactive. All users can actively participate in the generation or enrichment of content (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010). Likewise, travellers today can actively engage in consuming, producing, and diffusing travel information through the Internet (Pantelidis, 2010; Sparks and Browning, 2011). Fotis, Buhalis and Rossides (2011) revealed that social media are predominantly used after holidays for experience sharing. As the last stage of the travel planning process, some scholars investigated the motives of travellers in the post-purchase evaluation and the creation of UGC on social media. Previous research has found a number of reasons for posting travel-related UGC on social media. Pan, MacLaurin, and Crotts (2007) found that sharing life experience and social interaction are two major factors motivating bloggers to generate UGC. The intention of consumers to participate in online community has positive effects on their intentions to use the firm products/services and their intentions to recommend the host firm to others (Casaló, Flavián, and Guinalíu, 2010). Social media is important for consumers to not only acquire information but also for generating their own content to communicate with others (Drews and Schemer, 2010).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

A survey was conducted among the international and domestic inbound tourists at the international and domestic departure lounges of the international airport at Kochi, Kerala. For data collection, 600 respondents which included both domestic as well as international tourists were surveyed and complete responses were obtained from 412 respondents who fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The respondents were identified through a method of convenience sampling. Tourists were approached and given a questionnaire for self-completion upon obtaining consent. Randomization was incorporated into the times of the day and days of the

Determinants of Social Media Use Across Tourist Lifecycle Phases - An empirical investigation of tourist motives 3

week to avoid bias in data collection. The sample inclusion criteria such as tourists who are non-residents of the state of Kerala and those who use social media tools in their travel planning were applied. A structured questionnaire was developed after an extensive review of the relevant literature. The data collection instrument had two sections. The first part of the questionnaire was designed to collect data pertaining to the demographic and travel characteristics of the respondents. The second part of the questionnaire was designed to understand the influence of social media during the three phases of the tourist lifecycle and had variables on which the respondent had to respond on a 5-point Likert scale with ‘5’ indicating strong agreement, ‘1’ indicating strong disagreement and ‘3’ indicating neutrality. A 3-point scale would have given inadequate options, while a 7-point scale would have demanded a high level of sensitivity and discrimination. Hence a 5-point scale was sufficient and meaningful enough for this situation. The variables were identified from the literature review and expert opinion from tourism academics and professionals. Tables I and II describe the summarized demographic and travel characteristics of the respondents respectively.

Table 1: Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents

Variable Category Percentage of Respondents (%)

Gender Male 34.5Female 65.5

Age Group 20 – 30 54.4 31 – 40 13.3 41-50 17 51+ 15.3

Occupation Government Sector 14.6 Private Sector 30.8 Self-Employed 19.7Student 35

Education Schooling 4.1 Under-graduation 45.1 Graduate and above 50.7

Country of Residence International 56.1India 43.9

Annual Family In-come group (Domes-tic Tourists)

Below INR 5 lakhs 4.9INR 5–10 lakhs 29.9INR 10–15 lakhs 8.3Above INR 15 lakhs 1

Annual Family In-come group (Interna-tional Tourists)

< USD 30000 5.3USD 30000 – 60000 16USD 60000 – 100,000

22.1

> USD 100,000 12.6

Table 2: Travel Characteristics of the Respondents

Variable Category Percentage of Respondents (%)

Purpose of Visit Leisure/Recreation 76.7 Business/Event 8.3Medical 1.7Health/Wellness 7.3 Visit Friends and Relatives 6.1

Travelling with Family with kids 9.5Friends 63.1Spouse (Partner) 21.1 Solo 4.4 Business Associates 1.9

Number of trips/holidays taken in the last two years

0-1 11.7 2-3 48.3 4-5 14.8

More than 5 25.2Visit status First visit 80.6

Repeat Visit 19.4Type of travel-ler

Independent traveler 48.1 On a package/group tour 51.9

Duration of Trip 3-5 days 33.75-7 days 12.41-2 weeks 23.1More than 2 weeks 30.8

Accommoda-tion

Friends or Relatives 3.4 Budget Hotels 52.7 Star Hotels 22.3Home stays/B&B 21.6

DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

Factor analysis (using principal component analysis) was used to identify the factors influencing tourists’ usage of social media during the pre-trip, in-trip and post-trip phases of the travel lifecycle. Data collected from the sample of respondents who had rated their level of agreement/disagreement with the variables in the questionnaire was subjected to Factor analysis.

The variables which made up the pre-trip, in-trip and post-trip components were factor analyzed using Principal Component analysis after ascertaining the appropriateness of Factor analysis (Malhotra, 2004) using the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity (significant at the 0.05 level) and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) statistic (>0.6). Factors with eigen value greater than 1 and a loading of 0.5 and above were then rotated using varimax rotation with Kaiser Normalization.

In order to summarize the information contained in the original variables, a smaller number of factors should be


Table 3: Pre-trip Motives: Final Factors, Items, Loadings, Communalities and Eigen Values

Factors Significant Variables Factor Loadings Item Mean Factor Mean Eigen Values % of Variance

F1: Designing Itiner-ary

Book Hotels/Flights .804 2.53 3.09 3.21 35.63 Confirm right choice of Des-tination

.770 3.29

Plan my Travel Itinerary .655 2.88 Search for Reviews of Ho-tels, Attractions, Restaurants

.562 3.65

F2: Destination Spe-cific Information

Search for Specific Cam-paigns

.801 3.52 3.76 1.49 16.56

Access Content .732 3.98 Get more Information about leisure Activities

.573 3.76

F3: Others Experi-ences

Read about Travel Experi-ences of Others

.873 3.05 2.63 1.14 12.62

Connect with Travellers .825 2.21

extracted. In this research, approaches based on eigen values (that is, eigen value > 1) and Scree plot are used to determine the number of factors. To confirm the number of factors, a scree plot was drawn. To ensure that the variables for each of the factors were internally related, their Cronbach’s coefficient alpha were measured and found to have acceptable internal consistency reliabilities, that is, greater than 0.6 (Nunnally, 1967).

Pre-trip Phase

The pre-trip component comprised of 9 variables which were factor analyzed using Principal Component analysis and three factors emerged explaining 64.8 per cent of the variance. The summary result of the factor analysis of all the elements and sub-elements is presented in Table III. The factor analysis yielded three dimensions which were labelled as Designing itinerary, Destination-specific information and Others’ experiences.

The first factor identified is ‘Designing itinerary’ which consists of four items; Book hotels/flights, confirm right choice of destination, plan my travel itinerary and search for reviews of hotels, attractions, restaurants. This factor accounts for 35.63 per cent variance. It highlights the importance of social media as an avenue which provides reviews of hotels, attractions and restaurants at the destination. Tourists also try to confirm their choice of destination as a means to reduce the risk. The second factor identified is ‘Destination-specific information’ was made up of items such as search for specific campaigns, access content and get more information about leisure activities. This factor accounts for 16.56 per cent variance. It demonstrates how important it was for tourists to access a variety of content about their destination and also become more informed about leisure activities they can engage in. ‘Others experiences’ is the third factor and accounts for 12.62 per cent variance. It contains two items; read about travel experiences of others and connect with travellers. It shows how tourists desire to be acquainted with the experiences of other tourists in order to make an informed decision. An analysis of the factor means of the three factors that have been identified reveals that the

most important factor is ‘Destination Specific Information’ followed by ‘Designing Itinerary’ and ‘Others Experiences’.

In-trip Phase

The in-trip component comprised of 9 variables which were factor analyzed using Principal Component analysis and two factors emerged explaining 68.7 per cent of the variance. The summary result of the factor analysis of all the elements and sub-elements is presented in Table IV. The factor analysis yielded two dimensions that were labelled as Information seeking and Sharing experiences.

The factor ‘Information seeking’ consisted of five items; get information about attractions and leisure activities, find out more information about cuisines and places to eat, read reviews, post reviews, obtain information about accommodation and arrange local Trips. This factor accounts for 53.71 per cent variance. This factor reveals that tourists seek more information about attractions, leisure activities and the cuisines while at the destination. The other factor that was extracted was Sharing Experiences which


Table 4: In-Trip Motives: Final Factors, Items, Loadings, Communalities and Eigen Values

Factors Significant Variables Factor Loadings

Item Mean

Factor Mean

Eigen Values

% of Variance

F1: Information Seek-ing

Get Information about Attractions and Lei-sure Activities

.879 2.56 2.37 4.83 53.71

Find out More Information about Cuisines and Places to Eat

.853 2.79

Read Reviews .800 2.54 Post Reviews .798 2.4 Obtain Information about Accommodation .792 2.07 Arrange local Trips .746 1.84

F2: Sharing Experi-ences

Share my Travel Experiences .539 2.03 2.46 1.35 15 Stay Connected with Friends and Family .900 2.9 Upload Photos and Videos .747 2.45

accounted for 15 per cent variance and was comprised of three items; share my travel experiences, stay connected with friends and family and upload photos and videos. While tourists are on their holiday, a very pertinent need is the one

to stay connected as exemplified by this factor. An analysis of the factor means of these two factors reveals that the most important factor is ‘Sharing experiences’ followed by ‘Information seeking’.

Post-trip Phase

The Post-trip component comprised of 7 variables which were factor analyzed using Principal Component analysis and two factors emerged explaining 65 per cent of the

variance. The summary result of the factor analysis of all the elements and sub-elements is presented in Table V. The two factors which emerged were named as Sharing personal experiences and Sharing travel related information.

Table 5: Post-Trip Motives: Final Factors, Items, Loadings, Communalities and Eigen Values

Factors Significant Variables Factor Loadings

Item Mean Factor Mean

Eigen Values % of Variance

F1: Sharing Personal Experiences

Upload Photos and Videos .829 3.51 2.84 3.119 44.56 Let Family/Friends Know about Experiences

.763 3.25

Publish blog about Experiences .723 1.76 F2: Sharing Travel Re-lated Information

Share Travel related Informa-tion

.484 2.31 2.44 1.43 20.39

Suggest Improvements .841 2.46 Recommend the Destination .783 2.68 Inform other travellers about Experiences

.770 2.29

The first factor identified was ‘Sharing Personal Experiences’ and contained three items; upload photos and videos, let family/friends know about experiences and publish blog about experiences. This factor accounts for 44.56 per cent variance. This factor demonstrates that tourists share their holiday experiences with their family and friends by uploading content such as photos and videos of their trip. The next factor identified was ’Sharing Travel Related Information’ which accounts for 20.39 per cent variance. This factor contained items such as share travel related information, suggest improvements, recommend the

destination and inform other travellers about experiences. Tourists also feel the need to recommend the destination to others after the trip as illustrated by this factor. The factor means demonstrate that the more important factor is ‘Sharing personal experiences’ followed by ’Sharing travel-related information’.

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The overall results of this study support previous research conducted in this area. Previous studies (Wang, Yu and


Fesenmaier, 2002; Gretzel and Fesenmaier, 2009) have highlighted the use of Internet technologies in the pre-consumption phase to acquire information necessary for planning trips, formulate correct expectations, and evaluate, compare, and select alternatives, as well as to correspond with the providers of tourism products and services to prepare or execute transactions. The study has also shown the critical role played by social media in providing reassurance to tourists. This need for reassurance could be explained by the uncertainty involved in tourism where the purchase and consumption are at different points in time and hence tourists seek to minimise this perceived risk. The study reveals that tourists at the planning stage read about the experiences of other tourists at the destination. This online word-of-mouth provided by other travellers on social media goes a long way in allaying the fears of tourists.

Fig. 1: Motives for using Social Media Across the Tourist Lifecycle

This study indicates that some of the fundamental concerns for tourists while planning to take a trip are identifying a destination and subsequently reassuring themselves that they are making the right decision. This has far reaching implications for tourism providers who will have to make sure that there is no dearth of information regarding the destination. They can ensure this by engaging potential tourists through the use of multimedia and ensuring an omni-channel presence. This argument is reinforced by the findings of this study that tourists access content about the destination during the pre-trip phase. During the in-trip phase tourists were primarily concerned with staying in touch with their family and friends and communicating their experiences with them. They also search for more information about the destination with respect to leisure activities, cuisine and also read reviews while they are on holiday. This social media usage behaviour of tourists is mirrored in other studies (Fotis, Buhalis and Rossides, 2011). The post-trip stage points to the tourists desire to share their experiences with others especially family and friends. They also feel strongly about uploading photos and videos of their holiday on to social media platforms in addition to recommending the destination to other travellers. Fotis, Buhalis and Rossides (2011) revealed that social media are predominantly used after holidays for experience sharing. Sparks and Browning

(2011) noted that the reviews and stories written by tourists have the ability to enhance or detract from a firm’s or destination’s reputation.

This study analyzes the motives behind tourists’ use of social media in the travel lifecycle (Figure 1) as it demonstrates how tourists attempt determine the suitability of the destination itself and the elements that make up the destination based on the reviews posted and content created and uploaded by tourists who have travelled before them. Tourists are constantly searching for the right place to take a vacation and it is imperative that tourism providers and destination marketers showcase their destinations in a positive light. The study demonstrates how social media is an influential tool for travellers looking to find the right destination to travel to. Social media can be a powerful ally to tourism providers who can use it to boost the attractiveness of their destinations and intensify the flow of tourists both domestic and international.

CONCLUSION

The results of the study present the motives behind the use of social media by tourists in the pre-trip, in-trip and post-trip phases of the tourist lifecycle. This study adds to the existing literature on the relative importance of the motives behind the use of social media during these three phases. Tourists primarily seek information on social media about potential destinations in an effort to become inspired and also reassure themselves by seeking out reviews and detailed information. They wish to stay connected with their friends and family even while on holiday. The emergence of social media as a relevant and trustworthy source of information to travellers and their perception of its utility is depicted in this study. This research provides insights for Destination Marketing Organizations (DMO) and other tourism providers on how to connect with travellers on social media throughout the tourist lifecycle on various channels efficiently in order to inspire tourists to visit their destinations.

REFERENCES

Beritelli, P., Bieger, T., & Laesser, C. (2007). The impact of the Internet on information sources portfolios: Insight from a mature market. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 22(1), 63-80.

Buhalis, D., & O’Connor, P. (2005). Information commu-nication technology revolutionizing tourism. Tourism Recreation Research, 30, 7-16.

Buhalis, D., & Law, R. (2008). Progress in information technology and tourism management: 20 years on and 10 years after the Internet - The state of eTourism research. Tourism management, 29(4), 609-623.


Burgess, S., Sellitto, C., Cox, C., & Buultjens, J. (2009, June). User-generated content (UGC) in tourism: Benefits and concerns of online consumers. In ECIS (pp.417-429).

Casaló, L. V., Flavián, C., & Guinalíu, M. (2011). Understanding the intention to follow the advice obtained in an online travel community. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 622-633.

Chung, J. Y., & Buhalis, D. (2008). Web 2.0: A study of on-line travel community. Information and communication technologies in tourism, 70-81.

Cox, C., Burgess, S., Sellitto, C., & Buultjens, J. (2009). The role of user-generated content in tourists’ travel plan-ning behavior. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, 18(8), 743-764.

Dasgupta, D. (2011). Tourism marketing. New Delhi: Dorling Kindersley.

Drews, W., & Schemer, C. (2010). eTourism for all? Online travel planning of disabled people. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism, 507-518.

Engel, J., Blackwell, R., & Miniard, P. (1990). Consumer behavior. Chicago: Dryden Press.

Fotis, J., Buhalis, D., & Rossides, N. (2011). Social media Impact on Holiday Travel Planning. International Journal of Online Marketing, 1(4), 1-19.

Gretzel, U., & Yoo K. H. (2008). Use and Impact of Online travel Reviews. In P. O’Connor, W. Höpkenand U. Gretzel (Ed.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2008, Proceedings of the International Conference in Innsbruck, Austria, Wien: Springer, pp. 35-46.

Huang, Y., Basu, C., & Hsu, M. K. (2010). Exploring mo-tivations of travel knowledge sharing on Social network sites: An empirical investigation of US college students. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management, 19(7), 717-734.

Hudson, S., & Thal, K. (2013). The impact of Social media on the consumer decision process: Implications for tour-ism marketing. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 30(1-2), 156-160.

Jeng, J., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2002). Conceptualizing the travel decision-making hierarchy: A review of recent de-velopments. Tourism Analysis, 7(1), 15-32.

Law, R., Leung, R., & Buhalis, D. (2009). Information tech-nology applications in hospitality and tourism: A review

of publications from 2005 to 2007. Journal of Travel and Tourism Marketing, 26(5-6), 599-623.

Litvin, S. W., Goldsmith, R. E., & Pan, B. (2008). Electronic word-of-mouth in hospitality and tourism management.Tourism Management, 29(3), 458-468.

Lo, I. S., McKercher, B., Lo, A., Cheung, C., & Law, R. (2011). Tourism and online photography. Tourism Management, 32(4), 725-731.

Malhotra, N. (2004). Marketing research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Nunnally, J. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Pan, B., MacLaurin, T., & Crotts, J. C. (2007). Travel blogs and the implications for destination marketing. Journal of Travel Research, 46(1), 35-45.

Pantelidis, I. S. (2010). Electronic meal experience: A con-tent analysis of online restaurant comments. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly.

Schmallegger, D., & Carson, D. (2008). Blogs in tourism: Changing approaches to information exchange. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 14(2), 99-110.

Sparks, B. A., & Browning, V. (2011). The impact of online reviews on hotel booking intentions and perception of trust. Tourism Management, 32(6), 1310-1323.

Thevenot, G. (2007). Blogging as a Social media. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(3-4), 287-289.

Tussyadiah, I. P., Park, S., & Fesenmaier, D. R. (2011). Assessing the Effectiveness of Consumer Narratives for Destination Marketing. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 35(1), 64-78.

Wang, Y., Yu, Q., & Fesenmaier, D. (2002). Defining the virtual tourist community: implications for tourism marketing. Tourism Management, 23(4), 407-417.

Yoo, K. H., & Gretzel, U. (2009, June). Generational differences in CGM perceptions and use for travel planning. In Proceedings of the 40th annual conference of the travel and tourism research association, Honolulu, HI.

Yoo, K. H., & Gretzel, U. (2010). Antecedents and impacts of trust in travel-related consumer-generated media. Information Technology and Tourism, 12(2), 139-152.

Yoo, K. H., & Gretzel, U. (2011). Influence of personality on travel-related consumer-generated media creation. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 609-621.

IMPACT OF HEALTHCARE UTILITIES AND LAW & ORDER CONDITIONS ON TOURISM: A STUDY ON COMMUNITY-BASED TOURISM IN

NORTH EAST INDIA

Mridul Dutta*, Nayan Barua**

AbstractTourists and tour operators would seldom compromise on the safety conditions, cleanliness, hygiene practices (Kant, 2008) and basic healthcare infrastructure of a tourism destination. The economic benefits and cosmopolitan thought process arising from practices of community-based tourism process may discourage simmering tensions arising out of ideological differences and conflicting ethnicity in a destination. Instead of an exclusive remark that tour operators would seldom compromise on safety and hygiene aspects of a destination in North East India, this paper shall provide empirical findings at granular level. The author(s) debate on issues of safety, law & order conditions and disaster management preparedness of a typical village practicing community based tourism. There is an attempt on relating positive impacts of development indexes with community based initiatives of North East India.

Keywords: Community Based Tourism, Healthcare Facilities, Utilities Measures, Disaster Management Preparedness

INTRODUCTION

Travel, tourism and leisure segment is becoming a major thrust area for Assam and the North Eastern States. North East India is said to be the paradise for tourist, yet to be explored, but tourist and the host communities of Assam and North East India have mixed opinion about the leisure services and the socio-cultural impacts of tourism. There are many reasons to this theory, but having said that, couple of villages in some destinations of Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland, and Meghalaya is emerging as major attractions. The leisure business model of these villages is based on responsible tourism and a memorable experience of staying with the host community. Community Based Tourism is responsible tourism which holds long term sustainable benefits for the host community, the business, the residents, and provides satisfying experience to the tourist. In Community Based Tourism (CBT), the host community invites the tourist to the destination with the provision of overnight accommodation in their villages. CBT model ensures that a part of the tourism receipts is provisioned for sustainable development of the village and the destination (Dutta & Das, 2011). They earn money and

recognition through homestay operations, guiding & leisure activities, food, cuisines, beverages, souvenir, craft sales, and as an alternate livelihood opportunities. CBT tries to bring in exhaustive participation of the host community in the tourism value chain.

The components of community based tourism are tourist, host community, home-stay facility provider, infrastructure and distribution & value integration partner (Dutta, 2014). The community may choose to partner with a public/private sector entity to provide capital, clients, marketing, and other expertise. The partners may or may not own any part of the tourism enterprise subject to the ideals of supporting community’s development, conservation, tourism planning and handholding. CBT stresses on the quality of cultural development, environmental considerations, divergent needs, potential of the primary stakeholder and its inhabitants (Brohman, 1996). These activities would support and encourage wide range of social development and conservation objectives (The Mountain Institute, 2000).

CBT includes ecotourism attractions where the host community has substantial management control over destination leisure business and a major proportion of the benefits remain within the community (WWF Guidelines

* Assistant Professor, Tezpur University, Assam, India. Email: [email protected] ** Professor, Gauhati University, Assam, India. Email: [email protected]


Impact of Healthcare Utilities and Law & Order Conditions on Tourism: A Study on Community-based Tourism ... 9

for Community-based ecotourism development, 2001). The distribution of tourism revenue enhances welfare means, increase in livelihood opportunities, better conservation of resources, and, diversification of the regional tourism product as a brand (Sproule, 1996). The activities of CBT are lodging, food & cuisines, guiding, craft sales, entertainment and volunteerism at times.

HEALTH, HYGIENE, SAFETY, SECURITY AND LAW &ORDER ISSUES IN CBT

Among the stakeholders, the process of developing the tourism initiatives (Cooper, 2004) includes multi-pronged approach of participatory approaches, managerial control, research, capital investment & a good working knowledge of the leisure industry. The dependency of economies of North Eastern States such as Nagaland on tourism is limited due to its isolation from the Indian mainland and due to its turbulent political history (Deka & Baishya, 2009). Inspite of the troubled past, indigenous communities of Kohima have contributed to the Naga Heritage Village at Kisama, the Annual Hornbill Festival, Tourist Heritage Village at Touphema and Khonoma Green Village. The rural lifestyle and undisturbed natural setting in the protected areas serves as leisure content to the tourists, especially those coming from Indian Metros cities and European countries. But the question of economic benefits reaching the indigenous communities of the destination is still debatable (Gyamtsho, 1996).

Satisfaction level of inbound tourist is affected due to alarming service quality such as unjustified room prices, mismatch customer satisfaction issues, lack of good tour guides (Dhan, Gurung & Seeland, 2008). Their survey indicated that some tourist will prefer homestay facilities, provided it matches their ambience, sanitation and privacy. In contrast to the popular opinion, their research found that the most of litter and trash in the destination is actually created by local people only. Lack of investment strategy for establishing ecolodges or homestay facilities deters grassroot entrepreneurs in capital investment strategy (Buultjens, Tiyce & Gale, 2003). The extent of government and development partner’s assistance necessary to train the rural entrepreneurs in hospitality services, communication, education, sanitation, hygiene, book keeping and outdoor leisure operations is also as important as source of capital investment.

Profit sharing from CBT operations in decentralized infrastructure development such as provided financial aid to the families to renovate their homes, build kitchen and washrooms for quality homestay is already proven in Endogenous Tourism Projects and Mountain Shepherds Initiative of Nanda Devi Campaign (Equations, 2008). This practice promotes better health & hygiene practices among

the villagers. There are challenges faced by host on language skills, aspect of hygiene, cross culture food & beverage habits, water safety, trash collection and managerial skills. Improvement in capacity building and positive impact on social development indexes such as education, health-care, transparency in the exploitation of natural resources, and social safety program is also directly related to sustainable business model of CBT (Raffled, Berranger & Gouin, 2008). With opening up of emerging destinations for tourism, a simmering conflict emerges due to commercial exploitation (Bezbaruah, 1998).

Describing heritage preservation and tourism of Ladakh region, Bezbaruah mentions that the lucrative avenues might not be possible to be tapped by the local community. Attractions of economic benefits lure outsiders to exploit these avenues. This results into pressure not only from tourist alone, but also from the influx of thousands of tourism related seasonal workers coming to Ladakh from other regions of India and Nepal. Unplanned tourism development will put further pressure on the limited civic amenities such as solid trash management, congested single lane highways and electricity shortage. This eventually would lead hostility towards tourism intermediaries. Carrying capacity approach needs to be implemented from the beginning for a better sustainability of the CBT model. Segmentation strategy in profiling of tourists to CBT destination suggests a significantly higher proportion of leisure motivation as compared to business travelers (Foo, McGuiggan & Yiannakis, 2004). Therefore relevance of variables of leisure travelers and typology of tourist roles is important (Yiannakis, Gibson, 1992; 2002).

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES, METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATIONS

Given the above, this study shall endeavoured to draw insight into the operational aspects of community based tourism models of North East India. Specific objectives thus were: a). Analyze the hygiene, medical facilities and safety aspects of CBT villages and; b). Profile the buying behavior of tourist visiting CBT villages.

The population for the survey includes host community, tourism intermediaries, tourists and policy makers. The elements of this research are tourist staying overnight; village institution of the host community such as gaonburah, village council, khel1, and society; households of the CBT village including indigenous population; policy makers promoting

1 Khel is an institution in village governance in any Angami Naga village. This institution brings together several clans within the village community. Membership of a khel is either decided by birth or heredity. No village decision can be taken without the consensus of the khels of the village.


responsible tourism; and tourism intermediaries. First universe of the study comprises of the villages of the tourism destinations of NEI represented by six CBT villages of three states of NEI. These six villages are selected on the basis of the following judgment parameters: (a) The leisure business must have active community participation; (b) The village has to be newly discovered destination with visible frequency of tourists; (c) The leisure business model has to be sponsored a private equity or through a public private partnership or is a result of government aided programme within tourism policy.

The researchers have selected multi-staged judgment sampling method. In the first stage, on the basis of the judgment sampling, six CBT villages were selected based on their importance in the destination/circuit. In the second stage, two villages/localities from each destination were purposively selected. Finally, from these six selected villages/localities, opinion of 25 respondents or 2.5% of the total households of these three villages are collected using enumerated house number. The second universe of the study comprises of tourists, guides and the travel writers visiting the destination villages. Due to the unavailability of sampling frame for the population of tourists, intuitive sampling procedure is used and 25 samples are drawn from each village. The third universe of the study comprises of the traders (food & lodging), entrepreneurs, host community members serving leisure & tourism operations of destination. Judgment and snowball sampling method is used to collected opinion of 05 respondents from each selected village.

The study shall be conducted in three tourism circuits/destinations of NEI only. Due to the heterogeneous nature of North East India, it is difficult to conduct random sampling or stratified random sampling. In spite of having household data of the villages, the cluster sampling procedure using the sample frame may have some limitations. The household enumeration is mostly based on identified kitchen for each household. Logically, there is not much difference in the opinion of enumerated household, because their opinion is mostly influence by clan heads. Moreover, many a times, to receive public distribution system scheme and government subsidised aid benefits, the household enumeration data suffers severe manipulation.

The census data of some districts of NEI states have limitation of estimation (Census of India, 2011) and the same is acknowledged by Registrar of Census. The periodicity for the survey for the tourists visiting the destinations is from February 2013 to January 2014. The prospective tourists to these locations were not included in the survey. The geographical area of this research is the North-East India excluding the state of Sikkim. The business scope of this study is limited to community based tourism only. Business travelers and visitors are excluded from this study. The service quality benchmark and the hygiene practices of a typical responsible tourism initiative may not be same with the mainstream leisure business.

Primary data was collected using a schedule for host community and a questionnaire for tourists. The questionnaire contained close-ended, multiple options, ranking options, 5-point Likert scales as well as open ended questions. The schedule was administered to the host community members, respective gaonburah2 and village headperson, village entrepreneurs as well as the leading tour operators partnering the CBT destinations. Non-response was eliminated and the information was tabulated in SPSS table. The SPSS tool is used to conduct Chi Square analysis. Relationship between the dependencies and factors, if detected, the correlation was measured using Contingency Coefficient figure. If valid correlation is observed, the directional measure is conducted to find out the percentage of error in the judgment. The Lambda value is manually converted in percentage and subtracted from 100 to conclude a valid percentage.

For satisfaction ratings, 3 point and 5 point Likert scale were adopted, where 1 refer the lowest in satisfaction level and 3/5 was for the highest level of satisfaction. ‘T’ test were conducted with that rating as factor believed to be benchmark rating or when it is bare minimum service quality rating for the host community’s operations. Same modus-operandi of ‘T’ test was done to find out the cut off/benchmark level of expectation beyond which a tourist will not compromise. The findings of T-test conducted for said factor/variable for host operator and the tourist will allow this research to conclude the level of difference in the perception of the service/content. This process is used for gap analysis between the service provider i.e., homestay and destination conditions and the consumer i.e., tourist and tour operator.

Analysis of variance is done for measuring the satisfaction ratings for different set of the population based on age, income, relationship status, physical fitness and the city of origin. From the One way ANOVA operation, test of equal variance is sought. Only for those variable where equal variance is not observed, multiple comparison operation is conducted using Post-Hoc analysis. In Post Hoc analysis, the Games Howell correlation is identified to find out pairs having significant differences, i.e., opinion. The homogenous groups have been profiled as segments based on the socio-economic, demographic, business operation logic, geographic, interest related factors using Cross-tabulation, Chi-square tests and ANOVA.

The locations from which primary data is obtained are: (a) Manas National Park, Assam: Five fringe villages

of Manas National Park, Barpeta, Assam. It is a prominent wildlife attraction site and World Heritage Site by IUCN.

(b) Sualkuchi, Assam: Gandhmou Endogenous Tourist Project sponsored by UNDP and operated by the host

2 Gaonburah or village headperson is the traditional hierarchical institutional head of villages of North Eastern India adopted by tribes of Assam, Nagaland and Arunachal Pradesh.


community. It is about 60 Km from Guwahati city, Assam.

(c) Khonoma, Nagaland: This village promoted Khonoma Nature Conservation & Tragopan Sanctuary without government support. It has a CBT model under village council.

(d) Touphema, Nagaland: Touphema Tourist Village is an Angami Naga Heritage village. It is located about 41 Km away from Kohima town.

(e) Thembang, Arunachal Pradesh: Thembang-Bapu Community Conserved Area Management Committee of Thembang is an initiative by Western Arunachal Landscape by WWF-India in West Kameng District of Arunachal Pradesh. It practices CBT as an alternate livelihood opportunity.

(f) Zemithang, Arunachal Pradesh: Pangchen Lumpo-Muchat Community Conservation Management Committee is another initiative by Western Arunachal Landscape by WWF-India in Tawang District of Arunachal Pradesh. It also practices CBT as an alternate livelihood opportunity along with conservation.

ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

A. Demographic Profile of the Sampled Tourists

Table 1: Age in Years

Age category in years Frequency15 – 20 321 – 25 1926 – 30 2131 – 35 1136 – 40 2241 – 50 1151 – 60 1160+ 5Total 103

Source: Sample survey

Table 2: Occupation

Occupation Category FrequencyGovernment service 16Personal business/trader 16Corporate employee 12Professional 33Retired 9PSU 1Student and dependent 16Total 103


Table 3: Marital Status

Marital Status category FrequencyInvalid 1Just married 4Single 39Married 47Living together 4Engaged 8Total 103


Table 4: Annual income

Annual income category FrequencyInvalid 1Rs. 1 lakh 3Rs. 3 lakh 10Rs. 5 lakh 15Rs. 8 lakh 11Rs. 12 lakh 6Total 103


Table 5: Religion

Religion followed FrequencyInvalid 7Christian 29Islam 2Hindu 55Jew 3Buddhist 2Jain 5 Total 103


Table 6: Nationality

Nationality FrequencyAustralian 5British 7Canadian 1Chinese 2Deutsch 2French 7German 1Indian 66Spain 8Switzerland 2USA 2Total 103



B. Disaster Management and its Preparedness by the Host Community

Figure 1: Disaster Management Preparedness of the CBT Village

Testing the possibility of 29% “Not available” response as sample error, the cross tabulation is:-

The hypotheses to test the relationship between these variables are:-

H0: There is a relationship between preparedness of Disaster Management and inflow of destination’s tourist arrival to the destination.

H1: There is no relationship between preparedness of Disaster Management and inflow of destination’s tourist arrival to the destination.

Disaster Management Preparedness and Destinations

KohimaManas & Sualkuchi

DestinationsWestern

Arunachal Pradesh Total

Disas-ter Mgmt

Not available

Count 32 2 6 40Ex-pected Count

15.8 14.4 9.8 40.0

Avail-able


9.5 8.6 5.9 24.0

No prob-lem at all


14.6 13.3 9.1 37.0

Perfectly available


.8 .7 .5 2.0

Null Count 8 12 16 36Ex-pected Count

14.2 12.9 8.8 36.0

TotalExpected Count

Count 55 50 34 13955.0 50.0 34.0 139.0

Chi-Square Tests

Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)Pearson Chi-Square 60.327(a) 8 .000Likelihood Ratio 62.657 8 .000N of Valid Cases 139

a 3 cells (20.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .49.

The Chi-square value is 60.32 and is significant at the 0.000 level. Since the p value is less than level of significance (α = 0.01), the null hypothesis is rejected. There is no relationship between Disaster Management preparedness of host community and inflow of tourists to the destination.

C. Mob Protest and Political Issues Such as Bandhs, Boycotts, etc.

Figure 2: Host Community Control Over Leisure Services in Case of Political Protest

To test whether this 25% response “not available” is due to sample being drawn from a particular destination, the hypotheses for the negative correlation between “mob protest” and ‘destination preference’ shall be:-

H0: There is a relationship between mob unrest, Bandhs, boycott and it impacts the leisure operations of the host community.

H1: There is no relationship between mob protest, Bandhs, boycott and its least impact on leisure sector of the host community.


Mob Protest and Destinations

KohimaManas & Sualkuchi

DestinationsWestern Arunachal Pradesh Total

Mob pro-test

Not available Count 24 10 0 34Expected Count 13.5 12.2 8.3 34.0

Available Count 7 11 3 21Expected Count 8.3 7.6 5.1 21.0

No problem at all Count 9 4 15 28Expected Count 11.1 10.1 6.8 28.0

Perfectly available Count 7 15 6 28Expected Count 11.1 10.1 6.8 28.0

Invalid Count 8 10 10 28Expected Count 11.1 10.1 6.8 28.0

Total Count 55 50 34 139Expected Count 55.0 50.0 34.0 139.0

Chi-Square Tests


a 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5.14.

Symmetric Measures

Value Approx. Sig.Nominal by Nomi-nal

Contingency Coef-ficient .471 .000

N of Valid Cases 139

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

Since the p value is less than level of significance (α = 0.01), the null hypothesis is rejected to conclude that there no relationship between these variables. The Contingency coefficient (0.471) indicates a weak relationship.

DIRECTIONAL MEASURES

Lambda value of the independent variable is 0.238. Proportional Reduction of Error (Lambda) = 100- (0.238 x 100) % = 76.2%. Therefore statistically it is concluded that 76% the CBT villages of the Destinations are capable of managing mob protest, Bandhs, boycott without having any visible impact on leisure sector. However, this correlation is weak.

Value Asymp. Std. Error(a) Approx. T(b) Approx. Sig.Nominal by Nominal

Lambda Symmetric .212 .064 3.063 .002

Location (Independent) .238 .094 2.248 .025Mob protest (Dependent) .190 .054 3.283 .001

a Not assuming the null hypothesis. b Using the asymptotic standard error assuming the null hypothesis.

D. Law & Order Situations

Descriptive statistics indicates 29% opined “Perfectly available”, 27% respondents said “Not a problem” and 23% said “Available”. Thus, the sample indicates the entire

population of CBT villages under this study has maintained a good Law & Order condition.

E. Consumer Buying Behaviour in terms of Annual income

Cross tabulation between Star hospitality& Privacy and Annual Income


Figure 3: General law&order situation of the CBT Village.

Annual income in Rs. Lakh TotalNull One Three Five Eight Twelve

Star hospital-ity & pri-vacy

Cannot Com-promise

0 2 1 0 2 0 5

I need 0 0 5 2 0 0 7

I wish 1 1 2 9 7 2 22Total 1 3 8 11 9 2 34

By conducting the One Way ANOVA with ‘Annual Income of the tourist’ as the factor and comparing the means ‘Star hospitality & privacy feature’ of the accommodation by the married tourist, the hypotheses are:-

H0: Perception of accommodation feature ‘star hospitality & privacy feature’ is same for all category of tourist irrespective of their income status, i.e.,

μ 1 lakh = μ 3 lakh = μ 5 lakh = μ 8 lakh = μ 12 lakh

H1: Perception of accommodation feature ‘star hospitality & privacy feature’ is different for each category of tourist irrespective of their income status, i.e.,

μ 1 lakh ≠ μ 3 lakh ≠ μ 5 lakh ≠= μ 8 lakh ≠μ 12 lakh

Whereμ 1 lakh = the mean of tourists with annual income of Rupees one lakh

μ 3 lakh = the mean of tourists with annual income of Rupees three lakh

μ 5 lakh = the mean of tourists with annual income of Rupees five lakh

μ 8 lakh = the mean of tourists with annual income of Rupees eight lakh

μ 12 lakh = the mean of tourists with annual income of Rupees twelve lakh

One way ANOVA: Star hospitality & privacy

Sum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 5.100 5 1.020 2.131 .091

Within Groups 13.400 28 .479Total 18.500 33

Since, the P value in the One-Way ANOVA table is more than 0.05, the null hypothesis is not rejected and equal variance to be assumed among the group’s mean. Therefore this ends up rejecting the alternate hypothesis and committing Type II error, i.e., accepting a wrong null hypothesis. The assumption remains inconclusive.

F. Assurance of tour operator references

About 41% of the tourists have responded as “I need” and 28% said “I Wish” for Assurance of Travel Agency References as accommodation feature.

Cross tabulation betweenAssurance of the Travel Agency References and Arrival to destination

Western Arunachal Pradesh

Location Total

Assam NagalandAssurance of travel agency references

Cannot compromise 10 7 5 22

I need 16 6 20 42I wish 7 12 10 29

Total 33 25 35 93

Tourists visiting Western Arunachal Pradesh have expressed ‘cannot compromise’ while evaluating the assurance of the overall accommodation features by the Travel Agency. To test this assumption statistically about the population, the hypotheses are:

H0: The tourist is not influenced by the assurance of the travel agency about the accommodation facilities as available in the destination.

H1: The tourist is influenced by the assurance of the travel agency about the accommodation facilities of the destination.

Chi-Square Tests


a 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 5.91.

The null hypothesis is not rejected and statistically it is accepted that tourists, irrespective of the destination, are not influenced by the assurance of the tour operators while deciding the accommodation facilities of the CBT villages.


G. Tourist’s preference in having food & beverages from the host community.

Freshness, aroma and taste of food & cuisine.

The descriptive statistics infers that Food &Beverages offered by the host community are liked by most of the tourist. Comparing the opinion of the tourists about Food &Beverages based on place of origin of the tourist, the hypotheses are:-

H0: Perception of Food & Beverages by the tourists of North East India, Rest of India, Common Wealth Countries, European Countries, Asian Countries and USA is same, i.e., μNER = μCW = μEurope = μROI=μUSA=μAsia

H1: Perception of Food & Beverages is different for of the tourist segments based on city of origin or region, i.e., μNER≠μCW≠μEurope≠μROI≠μUSA≠ μAsia

Where μROI = mean of tourists originating from Rest of India (other than North Eastern India), μCW, μEurope, μNER, μUSA, μAsia = mean of tourists originating from Common Wealth, Europe, USA and Asian countries other than India.

Comparison of means of ‘Place of Origin’s, the variance indicates:-

Freshness, aroma and taste and Food & Beverages

Sum of Squares Df

Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 3.408 5 .682 2.466 .038Within Groups 25.982 94 .276Total 29.390 99

The F Probability value in the ANOVA table is less than 0.05. The null hypothesis is rejected to statistically conclude that equal variance cannot be assumed. It is concluded that the each segment’s mean on the perception about Food & Beverages is different for each other. By conducting Post Hoc analysis, Games Howell figure indicates the pairs with opposite opinion.

Multiple Comparisons (Dependent Variable: Freshness, aroma and taste)

* The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

Games-Howell

(I) D_City (J) D_City Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.95% confidence level

Lower Bound Upper BoundNER RoI -.029 .128 1.000 -.41 .35

CW -.525 .218 .209 -1.23 .17Europe -.006 .130 1.000 -.39 .38Asian .244 .084 .061 -.01 .50USA .244 .084 .061 -.01 .50

RoI NER .029 .128 1.000 -.35 .41CW -.497 .223 .276 -1.21 .21Europe .023 .139 1.000 -.39 .44Asian .273 .097 .096 -.03 .58USA .273 .097 .096 -.03 .58

CW NER .525 .218 .209 -.17 1.23RoI .497 .223 .276 -.21 1.21Europe .519 .224 .239 -.19 1.23Asian .769(*) .201 .023 .09 1.44USA .769(*) .201 .023 .09 1.44

Europe NER .006 .130 1.000 -.38 .39RoI -.023 .139 1.000 -.44 .39CW -.519 .224 .239 -1.23 .19Asian .250 .099 .168 -.06 .56USA .250 .099 .168 -.06 .56

Asian NER -.244 .084 .061 -.50 .01RoI -.273 .097 .096 -.58 .03CW -.769(*) .201 .023 -1.44 -.09Europe -.250 .099 .168 -.56 .06USA .000 .000 . .00 .00

USA NER -.244 .084 .061 -.50 .01RoI -.273 .097 .096 -.58 .03CW -.769(*) .201 .023 -1.44 -.09Europe -.250 .099 .168 -.56 .06Asian .000 .000 . .00 .00


The above Games-Howell test for mean difference, the pairs “USA and Common Wealth Countries” and “Asian and Common Wealth Countries” have significant differences in their opinion on the freshness, aroma and taste of food & beverages of CBT Village. Therefore tourist from USA, Asia and Common Wealth countries need to be understood exclusively about their perception and behaviour of freshness, aroma and cuisine interest.

H. Cleanliness and Hygiene expectations for the toilets in Homestays

From review of literature and observations, for creating a good quality cleanliness and hygiene conditions of homestay accommodation, the minimum expectation of the tourist is “okay toilets”. In view of limited qualitative references, most important quantitative factor measured about the toilet

facilities should be the overall perception by the tourist. Therefore the null and alternate hypothesis shall be:-

∑ Null Hypothesis: If the toilet conditions are not satisfactory, the cleanliness & hygiene condition of the toilets has to be below ‘okay’ by the tourists.

∑ Alternate Hypothesis: If the toilet conditions are satisfactory, the cleanliness & hygiene condition of the toilets has to be equal or above ‘okay’ by the tourists.

One-sample T test is conducted with test value 4 as ‘Okay condition of the toilets’ among 5 test values in ordinal scale about the cleanliness and hygiene condition. Test value 1 as ‘Not usable’, value 2 representing ‘Somewhat usable’, 3 representing ‘can’t say about quality’ and 5 as ‘clean toilets with required facilities’ in an ordinal scale.

One-Sample Test

Please rate the cleanliness of the toilets of the mentioned accommodation.

Test Value = 4

t df Sig.(2-tailed) Mean Difference95% Confidence Interval of the

DifferenceLower Upper

-3.281 98 .001 -.354 -.57 -.14

Since p value (0.001) is less than the level of significance (α = 0.05), the null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore it is concluded that the cleanliness & hygiene condition of the toilets can be satisfactory if it is perceived to be equal to ‘okay’ by the tourists. To identify the specific tourist based on city of origin having a positive preference about cleanliness & hygiene condition of the toilets of the CBT accommodations, opinion of the tourist based on place of origin (segments) are to be compared. Comparisons of the opinion of the tourists about preference for cleanliness& hygiene condition of the toilets by the Tourist, the null and alternate hypothesis will be:-

H0: Cleanliness & hygiene condition of the toilets in the accommodation facilities of CBT Village is equally liked by all tourists..

μNER =μCW = μEurope = μROI=μUSA=μAsia

H1: Cleanliness & hygiene condition of the toilets in the accommodation facilities of CBT Village is liked differently by the tourists.

μNER≠μCW≠μEurope≠μROI≠μUSA≠ μAsia

ANOVA

Cleanliness of the toilets of the mentioned accommodation.

Sum of Squares df

Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 38.205 5 7.641 9.549 .000Within Groups 74.421 93 .800Total 112.626 98

The F Probability value in the ANOVA table is less than0.05, the null hypothesis is rejected to conclude that equal variance cannot be assumed. In Post Hoc analysis, the Games Howell figure provides the set of tourist who have significant difference of opinion.

MULTIPLE COMPARISONS

Games-Howell

(I) D_City (J) D_City Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper BoundNER RoI 1.070(*) .288 .008 .21 1.93

CW -.571 .230 .161 -1.27 .13


(I) D_City (J) D_City Mean Difference (I-J) Std. Error Sig.95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound Upper BoundEurope -.213 .188 .865 -.77 .34Asian -1.263(*) .149 .000 -1.71 -.81USA -1.263(*) .149 .000 -1.71 -.81

RoI NER -1.070(*) .288 .008 -1.93 -.21CW -1.641(*) .302 .000 -2.55 -.73Europe -1.283(*) .271 .001 -2.10 -.46Asian -2.333(*) .246 .000 -3.10 -1.57USA -2.333(*) .246 .000 -3.10 -1.57

CW NER .571 .230 .161 -.13 1.27RoI 1.641(*) .302 .000 .73 2.55Europe .358 .209 .538 -.29 1.01Asian -.692(*) .175 .018 -1.28 -.11USA -.692(*) .175 .018 -1.28 -.11

Europe NER .213 .188 .865 -.34 .77RoI 1.283(*) .271 .001 .46 2.10CW -.358 .209 .538 -1.01 .29Asian -1.050(*) .114 .000 -1.41 -.69USA -1.050(*) .114 .000 -1.41 -.69

Asian NER 1.263(*) .149 .000 .81 1.71RoI 2.333(*) .246 .000 1.57 3.10CW .692(*) .175 .018 .11 1.28Europe 1.050(*) .114 .000 .69 1.41USA .000 .000 . .00 .00

USA NER 1.263(*) .149 .000 .81 1.71RoI 2.333(*) .246 .000 1.57 3.10CW .692(*) .175 .018 .11 1.28Europe 1.050(*) .114 .000 .69 1.41Asian .000 .000 . .00 .00

* The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

Statistically all segments of tourists based on place of origin had different perception about hygiene and cleanliness of the toilets of the accommodation facilities.

I. Cleanliness and Hygiene expectations of tourist about accommodation facility.

For creating a good quality accommodation with respect to cleanliness and hygiene conditions, the minimum expectation of the tourist must be either “okay and reasonable clean” or “hygienic accommodation with basic facilities”. Therefore the hypothesis for shall be:-

∑ Null Hypothesis: If the accommodation is not satisfactory, then the cleanliness & hygiene condition

of the accommodation has to be below ‘okay and reasonable’ by the tourists.

∑ Alternate Hypothesis: If the accommodation is satisfactory, then the cleanliness & hygiene condition has to be equal or above ‘okay and reasonable clean’.

One-sample T test is conducted with value 4 as ‘okay and reasonable clean’ among 5 test values in ordinal scale about the cleanliness and hygiene condition. Test value 1 as ‘Not clean’, value 2 representing ‘Needs improvement’, test value 3 representing ‘can’t say about quality’ and test value 5 as ‘hygienic accommodation with required facilities’ in the ordinal scale.


One-Sample Test

Please rate the clean-liness of the above mentioned accommo-dation.

Test Value = 4t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper-.282 98 .779 -.020 -.16 .12

For P value (0.779), the null hypothesis is not rejected. Therefore the accommodation will not be satisfactory in terms of cleanliness & hygiene condition if it is rated as ‘okay and reasonably clean’ by the tourists. Other test values are also needed to be validated.

Further, to qualify what qualifies for ‘satisfactory’ accommodation by the tourist, One-sample T test with test value 5 as ‘hygienic accommodation with required facilities’ in the same scale is to be conducted. The null and alternate hypothesis shall be:-

H0: If the accommodation is not satisfactory, then cleanliness & hygiene condition of the accommodation has to be below ‘hygienic accommodation with required facilities’ by the tourists.

H1: If the accommodation is satisfactory, then cleanliness & hygiene condition of the accommodation has to be equal or above ‘hygienic accommodation with required facilities’ by the tourists.

One-Sample Test

Please rate the clean-liness of the above mentioned accommo-dation.


Lower Upper-14.217 98 .000 -1.020 -1.16 -.88

For the test value 5, the P value (0.000) is less than the level of significance (α = 0.05). The null hypothesis is rejected. Therefore it is concluded that the accommodation will be satisfactory in terms of cleanliness & hygiene condition only when it is rated as ‘hygienic accommodation with required facilities’ by the tourists.

J. Tourists experience on safety measures as protection from wild animals.

Since all the CBT destinations are located far away from district headquarters and very close to National Parks and Sanctuaries, the tourists & the travel agents may have an apprehension about the safety measures in the CBT villages. To find out the satisfaction level in the village, 1-sampled T test is conducted. The assumption for T test is: Availability

of safety measure from wild animals in the CBT villages is “Not an issue’ with the village. The tourists were asked to give value in an ordinal scale in the questionnaire as 1 ‘Not acceptable’, 2 as ‘Acceptable with caution’, 3 as ‘Not an issue’ and, 4 as ‘Near perfect’. Since ‘Near perfect’ is a relative term, it was used to keep the ordinal scale value in a realistic manner so that the tourist will avoid picking this value. One-sample T test with value 3 as ‘Not an Issue’ for Safety measure from wild animals is conducted. Therefore, null and alternate hypothesis shall be:

H0: µ < 3

H1: µ ≥ 3

Where µ is the mean of the tourist’s opinion about safety measures from wild animals

One-Sample Test

Threat from wild animals

Test Value = 3T df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Difference 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference

Lower Upper-1.274 90 .206 -.110 -.28 .06


With test value 3 as ‘Not an issue’, the P value (0.206) is more than the level of significance (α = 0.05) and therefore it is concluded that the mean opinion of the population about this facility is not equivalent to “Not an issue” for the tourist, but could be more than that. One-sample T test is conducted with value 4 as ‘Near perfect’ for Safety measure from wild animals. Therefore, our null and alternate hypothesis shall be:

H0: µ < 4

H1: µ ≥ 4

Where µ is the mean of the tourist’s opinion about safety measures from wild animals.

One-Sample Test

Threat from wild animals


Lower Upper-12.871 90 .000 -1.110 -1.28 -.94

With test value 4 as ‘Near perfect’, the P value (0.000) is less than the level of significance (α = 0.05) concludes that the mean opinion of the tourist population is “Near perfect”.

INFERENCES AND CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence of preference by tourist to pick a destination village with its Disaster Management preparedness by the host community. This research concludes that three forth of CBT villages of destinations in NER are capable of managing mob protest, Bandhs, boycott without having any visible impact on the leisure sector. However, this correlation is weak. Surveyed villages indicate a good Law & Order condition. Tourists, irrespective of the destination, are not influenced by the assurance of the tour operators while deciding the accommodation facilities of the CBT villages. Tourists originating from USA, Asia and Common Wealth countries are exclusive to each other with reference to their perception about freshness of food, aroma and cuisine interest. While understanding the hygiene behaviour of the tourist, a minimum ‘Okay condition of the toilets’ remark is required as satisfied opinion for toilets. ‘Somewhat usable’ should not be used as benchmark for satisfaction. Moreover, all segments of tourists based on place of origin have different perception about hygiene and cleanliness of the toilets of the accommodation facilities. Regarding cleanliness & hygiene condition of homestay accommodation, it may not be satisfactory even if tourists rate them as ‘okay and reasonably clean’. The accommodation will be satisfactory in terms of cleanliness & hygiene condition only when it is rated as ‘hygienic accommodation with required facilities’ by the tourists. The mean opinion of the tourist population is “Near perfect”on safety measures on protection from wild animals for all the CBT destinations.

The perception of ‘star hospitality & privacy feature’ in homestay accommodation remained inconclusive with

reference to income category of tourist. The study highlights the need to have a strategic approach to boost the community based tourism as practiced in some destinations of North East India. A single pro-poor tourism strategy will not serve the purpose as it is seen that ‘one size fits all’ has numerous limitations destinations with diverse cultural background and heterogeneous environment. There is a scope for further research to understand the social-cultural factors of the host community friendliness toward tourist. There is need to understand the underlying reasons through further research on some other destinations of NEI. A study on the capital requirement and community practices on health & hygiene with special reference to CBT villages needs to be carried out. This research will provide references to future studies on community based leisure models.

REFERENCES

Bezbaruah, M. P. (199). Heritage preservation and planning for eco-sustainable tourism in Ladakh’ Indian Tourism: Beyond the Millennium, Gyan Publishing House.

Brohman, J. (1996). New directions in tourism for the third world. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(1), 48-70.

Buultjens, J., Tiyce, M., & Gale, D. (2003). Sustainable forest-based tourism in northeast New South Wales, Australia: A problematic goal. Tourism Review International, 7, 1-12.

Census of India (2011). Registrar General of Census, Government of India. Retrieved from http://www.cen-susindia.gov.in/2011census/Hlo-series/HH10.html (01 March 2016)

Cooper, G. (2004). Community based tourism-Experiences in the Caribbean: Lessons and key Considerations. Sixth Annual Caribbean Conference on Sustainable Tourism Development: Keeping the right balance-Land and Sea Encounters. Caribbean Natural Resources Institute at the Caribbean Tourism Organisation, Havana, Cuba.


Deka, P. K., & Baishya, P. (2009). Economy of Nagaland: Its strengths and potential. Journal of Economics and Commerce, 1(1), 54-60.

Gurung, D. B., & Seeland, K. (2008). Ecotourism in Bhutan-extending its benefits to rural communities. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(2), 489-508.

Dutta, M., & Das, R. (2011). Challenges of Community Based Tourism in a Typical Village of North East India. Sustainable Destination Excellence: Innovations in Alternative Tourism, ISBN 978-81-909704-4-0: 164-167.

Dutta, M. (2014). Community Based Tourism: A study of select destinations, PhD thesis Gauhati University, India.

EQUATIONS, (2008). Can Tourism Transform? Community-based Tourism Initiatives in India, Bangalore 560043, India. Retrieved from www.equitabletourism.org (20 February 2011).

Foo, J., McGuiggan, R., & Yiannakis, A. (2004). Roles tour-ist play-an Australian perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(2), 408-427.

Gibson, H., & Yiannakis, A. (2002).Tourist Roles-Needs and the Lifecourse. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(2), 358-383.

Gyamtsho, P. (1996). Assessment of the condition and po-tential for improvement of high altitude rangelands of Bhutan, PhD Dissertation in Natural Science, ETHZ, Switzerland.

Kant, A. (2008). Branding India-An Incredible Story. HarperCollins India (95).

Raufflet. E, Berranger, A., & Gouin, J. F. (2008). Innovation in business community partnerships: evaluating the im-pact of local enterprise and global investment models on poverty, bio-diversity and development. Corporate Governance Journal: The International Journal of Business in Society, 8(4), 546-556.

Sproule, K. W. (1996). Community-based Ecotourism Development: Identifying partners in the process The Ecotourism Equation: Measuring the Impacts. Bulletin Series, Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies No. 99, Yale University.

The Mountain Institute. (2000). Community-Based Tourism for Conservation and Development: What is Community based Tourism? Retrieved from http://www.cbt-i.org/travel.php (29 Sept 2014).

World Wide Fund for Nature (2001). Retrieved from www.zeitzfoundation.org/userfiles/WWFGuidelinesFor CommunityBasedEcotourismDevelopment.pdf (12 December 2013).

INTRODUCTION

It is an undisputable and well researched fact that tourism development in any given destination impacts the life styles and habits, the customs and culture, the leisure and spending of the local community both positively and negatively. Increase in employment, both directly and indirectly in the tourism sector, increase in income levels and consequently spending capacity, infrastructure development, increase in leisure and recreational opportunities for locals and tourist use are a few of the well known positive impacts of tourism. Unfortunately, like most phenomena, there is a flip side which accompanies the positives and this is manifested in

terms of the numerous obvious negative impacts of tourism development such as environmental pollution (air, water, land), socio-cultural impacts such as negative changes in culture, traditions and lifestyle patterns of hosts leading to loss of ethnicity, economic impacts such as increase in prices of goods and services, land, accommodations, financial leakages, as well as more insidious changes like migration of labour from traditional occupations and internal rural areas to more tourist centric areas and occupations. Thus, while rural areas remain underdeveloped and to a great extent unexploited, coastal areas experience rapid urbanisation and growth, most often unplanned and irreversible, which ultimately end up destroying the very natural resources that drew visitors to it in the first place (Kristnic et al., 2009).

* Associate Professor, Department of Commerce, St. Xavier’s College of Arts, Science & Commerce, Mapusa, Goa, India. Email: [email protected]

** Assistant Professor, Department of Commerce, St. Xavier’s College of Arts, Science & Commerce, Mapusa, Goa, India Email: [email protected]

*** Professor and Director, RCE Graz-Styria: Regional Center of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development, University of Graz, Graz, Austria. Email: [email protected]

**** Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Commerce and Management, Goa University, Taleigao Plateau, Goa, India. Email: [email protected]

***** Deputy Director for Academic Affair Bandung Institute of Tourism Jl. Dr. Setiabudi 186 Bandung 40141, Indonesia. Email: [email protected]


MULTI-STAKEHOLDER PERCEPTIONS ABOUT SUSTAINABLE TOURISM IN GOA:A STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING

Carmelita D’ Mello*, Santana Fernandes**, Friedrich M. Zimmermann***, Subhash Kizhakanveatil Bhaskaran Pillai****, Jacob Ganef Pah*****

AbstractThe state of Goa is a well known and popular mass tourism destination for both domestic and international tourists; and increased awareness about the ill-effects of mass tourism coupled with the economic necessity of encouraging tourism growth, has fuelled stakeholder interest towards sustainable tourism. The vital role that stakeholders play in the development and promotion of sustainable tourism in a destination cannot be overemphasized, yet there seems to be very little concerted involvement by them, in the planning and management of sustainable tourism development of the destination, also appears to be limited research carried out so far. The study aims at bridging this gap by assessing multi-stakeholder perceptions about various aspects about the sustainability of tourism in Goa in an attempt to predict the direction and consequently the strength of their support for the same using Structural Equation Modeling. The results indicate that stakeholder perception about sustainable tourism management, the focus of sustainable tourism and attitude towards sustainable tourism share a high, positive association with sustainable tourism while understanding of sustainability, its economics and the tourism industry and sustainability are positively associated to a moderate extent only. But actual participation in sustainable tourism efforts does not share a significant relationship with sustainable tourism.

Keywords: Multi-stakeholders attitude, Sustainable Tourism, Structural Equation Modeling, Goa


A community that plans and uses tourism as an alternative means of strengthening its economic development must develop sustainable tourism in order to meet the needs and demands of its resident community; viz.; local residents, entrepreneurs and also the government (Puczko and Ratz, 2000). Sustainable tourism development depends largely on the local residents’ attitudes since they form the key stakeholder group involved in critical tourism related decision making, as well as the labour resource base for tourism planning and development in their community. (Park et al., 2010). However, tourism research has, for over three decades focused its attention largely on residents’ attitude towards tourism and its consequent support for tourism development primarily along four dimensions viz.; [1] Economic dimension- employment opportunities, tax revenues, additional income (Akis et al., 1996; Dritsakis, 2004; Lee and Chang, 2008); [2] Social dimension - interactions between residents and tourists, education and entertainment of visitors, increase in crime (Akis et al., 1996; Byrd et al., 2009; Dyer et al., 2007; Kang et al., 2008; Kuvan and Akan, 2005); [3] Cultural Dimension - quality of life, conservation of local traditional values, increased cultural recognition – (Jurowski et al., 1997; Yoon et al., 2001; Huttasin, 2008); [4] Environmental dimension - air pollution, sound pollution, crowding, depletion of natural resources (Byrd et al., 2009).

While the host community includes local residents, entrepreneurs, government officials, NGOs etc who are among the key stakeholders in the tourism industry, another key stakeholder is the tourist or the visitor (guest) to the destination. Increasingly, visitors to destinations are aware of the problems of mass tourism development and wish to do their part in protecting the destination from the ill effects of mass tourism. Several studies have shown that tourists, who visit a destination and spend their money there, support sustainable tourism with respect to economic, social, cultural and environmental dimensions (Weaver and Lawton, 2004). However, in comparison to the large body of work on residents’ perception and attitude towards tourism, relatively little research has been done on tourist attitudes towards sustainable tourism development. Tourism, therefore, is an economic sector which must be approached in a special way due to the interlinking of all the stakeholders involved in tourism activities - both those based in the destination (local residents) and those who travel to such places (visitors) (Castellanos Orgaz, 2013).

So far no research has been carried out with respect to identifying multi-stakeholders perceptions towards sustainable tourism, which makes the study unique and provides valuable inputs on otherwise unexplored area. This study concentrates on the state of Goa as the research location in order to evaluate the perceptions of four stakeholders; viz.; local residents, entrepreneurs, government officials (hosts);

and tourists (guests) towards developing and supporting sustainable tourism. Therefore, the present study fills the gap by adding valuable knowledge, new perspectives and presents possibilities for consideration. The paper offers valuable inputs for different stakeholders of tourism industry; especially the academic institutions, hotels and restaurants, tour operators, government as well as NGO’s. This will ultimately leads to empowerment of local residents in the coming years.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Sustainability & Sustainable Tourism

Despite the substantial body of empirical and conceptual literature on various aspects of sustainability in recreation and tourism (Clarke, 1997; Collins, 1999; Tubb, 2003; Kelley et al., 2007) there remains “no widely accepted definition of sustainable tourism” (Swarbrooke, 1998). Confusion exists both with regard to the precise implications as well as with regard to the specific patterns of resource use implied in the definition of the term (Collins, 1999). The World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC, 2010) has equated sustainability with “guaranteed respect” for local environment, societies and cultures while the attainment of “triple bottom line” outcomes (i.e. economic, environmental and socio-cultural sustainability) is now widely evoked (Elkington, 1998).

Recognizing that all tourism entails cost, Weaver (2006) associates “sustainability with strategic management that strives to minimize the direct and indirect costs of a given activity whilst concurrently maximizing the attendant benefits, both locally and globally.” This definition of sustainability attempts to promote “enhancement” of the three pillars of sustainability (social, environmental, and economic) and moves beyond the status-quo definition of the Bruntland Report (1987). Further, with the recognition that costs and benefits of tourism are context dependent, the definition embraces the idea of sustainability as a paradigm with “strong” and “weak” manifestations (Hunter, 1997).

With respect to tourism, sustainability is differently referred to as “sustainable tourism”, “green tourism”, “eco-tourism”, etc., all having the end goal of achieving long term cooperation among multi-stakeholder groups in promoting tourism while safeguarding the eco-system. Sustainable tourism development is regarded as economically viable, financially profitable, environmentally sustainable and socio-culturally acceptable (WTO, 2002). Thus, all kinds of alternative forms of tourism including green tourism, eco tourism, nature tourism, culture and heritage tourism can apply these principles of sustainability (Harill and Potts, 2003; Stoddard et al., 2008; Chang and Lui, 2009).

Multi-Stakeholder Perceptions about Sustainable Tourism in Goa: 23

Stakeholders in Sustainable Tourism

With the increasing economic importance of tourism, given the employment it generates and the fact that tourism business activity is conducted in places that belong to local society, these businesses owe society, the natural environment and other elements in the surroundings, a certain responsibility, which is where stakeholder theory comes into play (Aguera, 2013). The concept of “stakeholders” gained wide acceptance with Freeman’s (1984) book “Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach”, a fact that is widely recognized by researchers (Donaldson and Preston, 1995; Mitchell et al., 1997; Jawahar and Mc Laughlin, 2001). Stakeholders in tourism, generally refer to those groups or individuals who are associated with tourism development initiatives and therefore can affect or are affected by the decisions and activities concerning those initiatives (Waligo et al., 2013).

Research on stakeholders in tourism covers a wide range of topics including stakeholder identification and analysis (Mereiros De Araujo and Bramwell, 1999; Hardy and Beeton, 2001; Aas et al., 2005; Vernon et al., 2005; Byrd, 2007); stakeholder types (Hall and Lew, 1998; Butler, 1999; Marwick, 2000; Mason, 2003; Getz and Timur, 2005); stakeholder involvement in sustainable development of tourism (Ryan, 2002; Getz and Timur, 2005; Hall, 2007; Dodds , 2007); stakeholder impact on tourism development initiatives (Bramwell and Sharman, 2000; Getz and Timur, 2005; Hall, 2007). However, in terms of issues involving stakeholders in tourism, empirical research lacks widespread documentation (Dodds, 2007; Hall, 2007). Thus, recognizing the role of stakeholders for the successful management of sustainable tourism and taking into account their varied perspectives on different issues is of vital importance (Bramwell et al., 1996; Hardy and Beeton, 2001; Dodds, 2007).

The issue is further complicated by the fact that effective stakeholder involvement is complex, problematic and often, underestimated (Jamal and Getz, 1995; Mowforth and Munt, 2003; Friedman and Miles, 2006) and that collaboration is often complicated by the existence of multiple and diverse stakeholders having widely differing viewpoints (Marwick, 2000; Ladkin and Bertramini, 2002). Further, while sustainable tourism embraces all three of the dimensions of tourism development; viz.; economic, environmental and social; attention in research has been largely focused on economic and environmental aspects neglecting, to a great extent, the social aspect and stakeholder processes (Hardy et al., 2002; Ryan, 2002).

For successful implementation of sustainable tourism, stakeholders can no longer be recipients of sustainable tourism plans but active participants in the planning process also (Southgate and Sharpley, 2002; Byrd, 2003). Very often, sustainable tourism strategies are developed for destinations

without considering stakeholder perspectives (Polonsky and Scott, 2005; Byrd et al., 2009; Currie et al., 2009) and as a result, do not necessarily favor stakeholder participation and sometimes actually hinder sustainability (Pretty, 1995). The current perspective of sustainable tourism implementation is driven by stakeholder partnerships and therefore, implies that successful sustainable tourism implementation depends greatly on effective stakeholder engagement. As a result of this, further research must necessarily explore the barriers and opportunities in stakeholder involvement as well as the factors which influence stakeholders when engaging with sustainability.

Challenges and Issues in Implementation of Sustainable Tourism

One of the main problems in the implementation of sustainable tourism lies in the complexity of the issue and its practical applications (Sharpley, 2000; Harris et al., 2002; Hardy et al., 2002; Dewhurst and Thomas, 2003). Interpretation of sustainability from an operational perspective too presents problems as the construct or term itself is inherently ambiguous and malleable. While controversy still exists in the various terms and their alternative approaches assumed to be synonymous with sustainable tourism (Butler, 1990; Wheeler, 1991; Mowforth and Munt, 1998; Hunter and Green, 1995), the methods of delivering sustainable tourism and the routes and directions for its practical application remain vague (Robson and Robson, 1996; Wall and Mathieson, 2006). Hopwood et al. (2005) attempted to explain this diversity in sustainability through the terms “status quo”, “reform” and “transformational” perspectives, where each subsequent perspective advocates higher levels of human and environmental wellbeing through concomitantly higher levels of social, cultural and political change. Hunter’s (1997) paradigm of weak and strong sustainability perspectives would appear to accord with the status-quo and transformational approaches (Weaver, 2012).

Coupled with the salient issues of agreement, coordination, collaboration and responsibility, were other issues such as mistrust of government policy, poor administration, failure to involve local communities, ineffective communication (Berry and Ladkin, 1997; Ioannides, 1995) lack of government support, lack of leadership and lack of stakeholder involvement or buy in (Dodds, 2007; Timur and Getz, 2009). This has resulted in a feeling of disempowerment among stakeholders, a lack of common ground and common interests between stakeholders and bureaucracy and consequently, an unwillingness to make significant changes in behaviour among stakeholders (Weaver, 2000; Getz and Timur, 2005; Miller et al., 2010; Cooper et al., 2009; Dodds and Butler, 2009). Stakeholders, therefore, need the opportunity to discuss issues that impact


their lives and livelihoods and must be empowered to do so (Norton, 2005; Wall and Mathieson, 2006).

Sustainable Tourism Models

Despite empirical analysis providing substantial information relevant to tourism planning and sustainability in specific case studies, tourism literature has thus far provided no generally accepted theoretical frameworks for the assessment of progress towards sustainability. Generally two schools of thought emanate - a political economy or reactive view which suggests residents have little, if any, voice in the developmental process of the destination and can at best react to consequences in their environment via plans imposed on them by planning groups or outside bodies (Keogh, 1990). The functional view considers tourism as a proactive force, which when appropriately managed seeks to maximize community returns while minimizing costs to its environment and culture via stakeholders who collectively manage the tourism system (Keogh, 1990).

Jamal and Getz (1995) define these collaborative efforts as “a process of joint decision making among autonomous, key stakeholders of an inter-organizational, community tourism domain designed to resolve planning problems of the domain and/or to manage issues related to the planning and development of the domain”. Fennel (1999) and Weaver (2001) in their research on model relationships between sustainable and unsustainable tourism claim that it is practically impossible to designate a clear boundary between sustainable and unsustainable tourism. Fennel (1999) explains sustainable tourism in relation to the various aspects of tourism (attraction, accommodation, accessibility and ancillary services) and the kind of degrees or stages of tourism. While Weaver (2001) claims that mass tourism (closer to unsustainable tourism) constitutes a kind of continuum of alternative tourism (closer to sustainable tourism) such that they cannot be treated as opposing categories. Two conclusions can be drawn from these disparate viewpoints; viz.; (1) principles of sustainable tourism should be introduced in all forms of tourism thus causing change in the desired direction from unsustainable to sustainable tourism and (2) if mass tourism is a continuum of alternative tourism, a less desirable direction of change from sustainable to unsustainable tourism is possible.

Hunter, 1997, conceptualized (stages) degrees of development (functioning) of sustainable tourism wherein he contrasted the position of tourism vis `a vis the position of sustainable development within diverse areas distinguishing four variants of functioning of tourism within sustainable development. Hunter’s model is criticized in that it excludes the possibility of wide scale tourism development which would take into account principles of sustainable development. In their model of Sustainable Tourism, Durydiwka et al., (2010)

contended that sustainable tourism was related to three main types of tourism; viz.; natural environment (ST natural), cultural environment (ST cultural) and requiring certain skills from tourists (ST qualifying) and that the holistic conception of sustainable tourism should be understood as a combination of various forms of tourism complemented by common objectives.

Butowski (2012) presented a versatile model of Sustainable Tourism designed as a theoretical construct which would constitute a theoretical basis for detailed application models, applicable in all conditions, on every reception area and for every type of tourism. The aim of the sustainable tourism model was to strive for a state of equilibrium in fulfilling the needs of two main stakeholder groups; viz.; tourists and community residents. It is a short term cost-benefit model which considers tourism development and its concomitant benefits to both residents and tourists versus resource degradation as the unavoidable cost to be incurred due to tourism development. It considers the minimum/maximum accepted level of benefits (need fulfillment) of both tourists and residents versus the minimum/maximum/unavoidable accepted level of costs (degradation) of the natural and anthropogenic environment where minimum accepted benefits and maximum accepted degradation are the two pairs of interrelated independent variables and unavoidable degradation and maximum benefits are the dependent variables. Sustainable tourism is the area of balance in fulfilling the needs of both stakeholder groups.

Numerous other models of Sustainable tourism have been proposed by various researchers to suit their particular types of tourism promotion through research objectives and destination requirements. The model of sustainable tourism based on systematic analysis (Camus et al., 2014) views the tourist sector as a complex social system (due to its multiple components) involved in multiple mutual interactions which successfully integrates the principles of sustainable development so as to ensure long term sustainable tourism.

Kristinic and Drpic (2013) suggest a model of sustainable tourism management for a destination based on the SWOT analysis of the tourism development of the destination. The Management Model so suggested for sustainable tourism uses an association/organization of various stakeholder groups in clusters whose activities will be designed and coordinated by a ‘Centre for Sustainable and Responsible Tourism of a Destination’. Such an interdisciplinary approach will not only provide for synergy in the effort towards sustainable tourism but will, both individually for each stakeholder and collectively for the destination, eliminate the negative phenomena of tourism development while emphasizing its advantages.

Shikida et al., 2010 proposed a simple tourism relationship model depicting the relationship between community


and extra-community stakeholders to enable the effective development of sustainable tourism. [The successful development of sustainable tourism is brought about by the identification of two important factors namely, a “circulation mechanism” which connects community resources and extra-community stakeholders through community based intermediaries and a balancing mechanism that considers the existence value and economic value, supplemented by “community based intermediaries” function to transfer financial capital from non-tourist sources.] The model attempts to balance two separate values- the economic value (which extra-community stakeholders focus on maximizing and which could overuse community resources) and the existence value (which communities tend to favour in terms of protecting resources). The intermediary, which is a subsystem of the model represents the value of the community and tries to balance the relationship between Community and extra community stakeholders by a ‘circular mechanism’ and a ‘control flow’ mechanism to transfer financial capital from non financial resources.

Okazaki, (2008) advocates community participation in the tourism planning process as a way of implementing sustainable tourism and reviews the major theories of community participation as the basis for defining a community based tourism (CBT) model which used to assess the current status of a community with regard to actual participation levels in a tourist destination using a two-dimensional graph. The model was empirically tested in Palawan in the Philippines and the levels of community participation, collaboration and social capital estimated as well as suggested initiatives to enhance CBT.

Johnston and Tyrrell, (2005) suggested a mathematical model based on the application of Optimal Control Theory to Fisheries put forward by Clark, (1990). It assumes two main primary interest (stakeholder) groups who are interested in the existence and outcomes of tourism- local permanent residents and tourism planners. The model stresses the impossibility of a universally sustainable environmentally optimal solution across all stakeholder groups but attempts to assist tourism planners in understanding the various choices and tradeoffs inherent in the various options for environmentally sustainable tourism and is thus, clarifying and structuralizing the concept of tourism sustainability.

Despite the diversity of sustainable tourism models in terms of the research objectives, the types of tourism or the destinations covered and the problems inherent in the study of determining a model of sustainable tourism, a common thread through these models is the need for stakeholder participation in the process of sustainable tourism. Keeping this in mind, in the present research an attempt is made to gauge the understanding of various aspects of tourism from the point of view of multi-stakeholders in the tourist destinations with a view to suggesting a model that was

developed in Cornwall for sustainable tourism but which may be applied in the State of Goa bearing in mind the similarities in the two destinations especially their small size and coastal nature.

Sustainable Tourism and Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)

Structural Equation Modelling (SEM) is a renowned and widely used statistical technique to test theory in a number of academic disciplines (Hair et al., 1998; Schumacker and Lomax, 2004) and behavioural sciences as well. It can be viewed as a combination of multivariate statistical techniques i.e. factor analysis, discriminant analysis and regression analysis or path analysis where the relationship between the theoretical constructs (represented by latent factors) are represented by regression or path coefficients between the factors. (Klem, 2000; Hox and Bechger, 1998). The main advantages of SEM over other statistical techniques is that it allows for the estimation of a series but independent multiple regression equations simultaneously and has the ability to incorporate latent variables into the analysis accounting for measurement of errors in the estimation process (Hair et al., 1998). There are many studies carried out in the area of tourism using SEM where multiple variables are being analysed for developing models (Refer Figure 1).

While SEM is not a new statistical technique (Joreskog, 1967; 1969) its usage in tourism research is relatively recent. Yoon et al., (2001) used SEM to examine the effects of four exogenous constructs dealing with economic, social, cultural and environmental impacts of tourism on two endogenous constructs- the first being total impact and the second being the residents’ support for tourism development. Ko and Stewart (2002) used SEM to test the relationship between residents’ perceived tourism impacts and attitudes towards host community in Korea and found that community satisfaction was closely related to perceived positive and negative impacts which further caused their attitude towards additional tourism development. Dyer et al., (2007), developed a structural model to describe tourism impact perceptions of the residents in Queensland, Australia and their subsequent effect on the resident support for tourism development wherein positive economic impacts had the largest influence on support for tourism development. Gross and Brown (2008) used SEM to examine the relationship between involvement and place attachment in a tourism context. He and Song (2009) investigated the mutual relationships among tourists’ perceived service quality, value, satisfaction and intentions to repurchase package tours from travel agents using SEM.

Ballantyne et al., (2011) attempted to investigate the extent to which wildlife tourism experiences positively impact


tourists’ awareness, appreciation and actions in relation to the specific wildlife encountered as well as the environment in general using SEM to identify those factors that best predict positive long term learning and environmental behavior change. Nunkoo and Ramkissoon, (2011) developed a model of community support based on social exchange theory using SEM and suggested that residents’ support for tourism was influenced by perceived benefits, perceived costs and community satisfaction. Vargas - Sanchez et al., (2011) used SEM to investigate the possibility of proposing a universal model to explain residents’ attitude towards tourism development given its wide popularity with tourism researchers and it supported the hypothesis that positive impacts have a favourable influence on residents’ perspective. Assante et al. (2012), used SEM to construct a model to understand resident perceptions about tourism impacts in Hawaii and their consequent involvement and satisfaction with tourism so as to increase the sustainability of future tourism development. Hallak et al., (2012) attempted to examine and develop a model using SEM of how place identity, entrepreneurial self efficacy and support for community influence the entrepreneurial performance

of small and medium tourism enterprise owners (SMTE) and found that place identity (the place from where the business operates) of tourism entrepreneurs has a significant positive direct as well as indirect effect on entrepreneurial performance.

Ramkisoon et al., (2013) used SEM to examine the four dimensions of place attachment as a second order construct and studied its relationship with place satisfaction and low and high effort pro-environmental behavioural intention. Romao et al., (2014), used SEM along with other statistical techniques to depict the relationship between tourist choice of a particular trip (boat tour) and the effect of this choice on their satisfaction and loyalty of tourists as well as its implications for the marketing and management of the destination. Xu and Fox, (2014) undertook a study of visitors to the protected areas in different cultural contexts viz China and the UK, to explore whether the value a person attaches to the environment influences their attitude towards sustainable tourism development in National Parks and found that ecocentric values significantly influence people’s attitude towards tourism and sustainable development.

Figure 1: Summary of Literature Review on SEM

Author and Yearof Publication

Variables Used in the Study

Lindberg and Johnson(1997)

Demographic variables; values (net economic gain; minimal disruption of daily life; adequate recreation facili-ties; aesthetically pleasing environment; satisfying interaction with non residents; affirmation of community/cul-ture; influence over community decisions); attitudes towards tourism development

Bachleitner and Zins(1999)

Tourism Impact and Attitude Scale (TIAS scale) and additional variables (tourism development; personal eco-nomic benefits; infrastructure; crowding; pollution and discriminations)

Yoon et al. (2001)

Four exogenous constructs including economic impact, social impact, cultural impact, environmental impact, two endogenous variables including total impact and support for tourism development

Gursoy et al. (2002) Community concern; Community attachment; Ecocentric attitude; Utilization of tourism resource base by resi-dents; The state of the localeconomy; Perceived benefits; Perceived costs; Support for tourism based in two typologies (cultural and historic attractions; and cultural and folks events)

Ko and Stewart,(2002)

Examined five latent constructs including Positive and negative impacts of tourism, personal benefits derived from tourism, overall community satisfaction and attitude toward additional tourism development

Jurowsky and Gursoy(2004)

Community concern; Ecocentric attitude; Utilization of the tourism resources by the residents; State of the local economy; Perceived benefits; Perceived costs; Support for two tourism development typologies (cultural or his-toric based attractions and cultural and folk events

Gursoy and Rutherford(2004)

Community concern; Community attachment; Ecocentric attitude; Utilization of tourism resource base by resi-dents; The state of the local economy; Perceived economic, social and cultural benefits; Perceived social and cultural costs; Support for tourism based in three types (natured based developments, cultural or historic based development and nature programs)

Johnston and Tyrrell(2005)

Environmental Quality, Growth of renewable resources Number of visitors per period

Gursoy and Kendall(2006)

Community concern, Community attachment, ecocentric attitude, Perceived benefits, perceived costs, Support for Mega Events

Dyer et al.(2007)

Impact of five factors- negative socio- economic impact, positive social impact, negative social impact, positive cultural impact, positive economic impact and support for further tourism development




Gross and Brown, (2008)

Examines the predictive relationship between involvement a multidimensional construct consisting of attraction, centrality to lifestyle, self-expression, food and wine) and place attachment (conceptualised as a multidimen-sional construct of place dependence and place identity)

Oviedo-Garcıá,Castellano-Verdugo,and Martıń-Ruiz(2008)

Positive impacts (economic, socio-cultural, and environmental), negative impacts (economic, socio-cultural, and environmental), global evaluation, tourism development, tourism planning

He and Song, (2009)

Studies the mutual relationships among tourists’ perceived service quality, value, satisfaction, and intentions to repurchase packaged tour services from travel agents

Vargas-Sańchez et al.(2009)

Personal benefits from tourism development; Perceived negative impacts of tourism; Perceived positive impacts of tourism, Satisfaction with the community; Support for a major development of tourism

Nicholas et al. (2009)

Community attachment, environmental attitudes, level of involvement in Pitons Management Area (PMA), per-ception of the PMA, Support for sustainable tourism development in the PMA, Support for the PMA as a World Heritage Site

Gursoy et al. (2009)

Community concern; Community attachment; Ecocentric attitude; Utilization of tourism resource base by resi-dents; The state of the local economy; Perceived economic, social and cultural benefits; Perceived social and socio-economic costs; attitudes towards two different types of tourism development: mass tourism and alternative tourism

Hsieh, Park, Huh(2010)

Residents and tourists Perceptions about Tourism’s positive economic impact , positive social impact, negative social impact, positive cultural impact, negative environmental impact and support for sustainable tourism

Nusair and Hua(2010)

Influence of satisfaction, trust and investment on affective commitment towards purchase of travel products

Nunkoo and Ramkisoon, (2011)

Residents level of trust tourism institutions, residents perceived level of power to influence development, Resi-dents satisfaction with neighborhood conditions are antecedents of perceived costs and benefits and overall satis-faction with community which ultimately influence support for tourism development

Ballantyne, Packer and Falk, (2011)

Measured the effect of visitors’ entering attributes(pre-visit environmental orientation and motivation for visit) salient aspects of experience and short and long term learning and environmental behavior change outcomes

Vargas- Sanchez, Porras-Bueno,and Plaza-Mejıá, (2011)

Personal benefits from tourism development; Perceived negative impacts of tourism; Perceived positive impacts of tourism, Satisfaction with the community; Support for a major development of tourism

Nilplub and Khang,(2012)

Impact of Pull motivation, push motivation, perceived value of moneyand perceived service quality on satisfac-tion and ultimately on destination loyalty

Back, (2012)

Re-examined the links between Attitudinal brand loyalty (through the variables of cognitive brand loyalty, af-fective brand loyalty, conative brand loyalty) and Action brand loyalty (through the variables of repurchasing frequency and repurchasing , amount)

Hallack, Brown and Lind-say, (2012)

Examines how identity, entrepreneurial self-efficacy and support for community influence entrepreneurial perfor-mance of small and medium tourism entreprises

Assannte, Wen and Lottig, (2012)

Residents perception of tourism environmental impacts and the Residents perception of Government management of tourisms’ impact on overall community satisfaction and attitude towards sustainable tourism

Musa and Ong, (2012)

Examines causal relationships between experience, personality and attitude on behavior of scuba divers

Lee (2013)

Assessment of residents support for sustainable tourism development using latent variables of community attach-ment, community involvement, perceived benefits, perceived costs

Ramkisoon, Smith and Wei-ler, (2013)

Investigated place attachment as a second order construct involving (Place dependence, Place identity, Place affect , Place social bonding and its relationship with Place satisfaction and visitors high and low pro-environ-mental behavioural intentions

Kim, Uysal and Sirgy, (2013)

Residents perceptions of tourism’s economic, social environmental and cultural impacts, sense of material wellbeing, sense of community, wellbeing, sense of emotional wellbeing, sense of health and safety on Overall Life satisfaction mediated by stage of tourism development in the community




Deng and Li, (2013) Examines the relationship between event image, destination image, overall attitude towards destination and be-havioural intentions towards the destination

Arsezen-Otamis and Yusba-sioglu, (2013)

Studied impact of Diamond Model( factor conditions, demand conditions, work and competition structures, re-lated and supporting structures and State)on perceived performance of Antalya tourism clusters

Untong and Kaosa-ard, 2014

3 Latent variables – Structure(exogenous), Private investment, Conduct of local government(endogenous) influ-encing the success of sustainable tourism development

Xu and Fox, (2014)

Examines whether Anthropocentric and ecocentric attitudes(value) attached to tourism and the environment, con-servation and sustainable tourism development

Romao, Neuts, Nijkamp and Shikida, (2014)

Examined the effect of tourist and trip characteristics on tour choice and the effect of this choice on tourists’ satisfaction and loyalty

Al-Refaie, (2015)

Impact of HRM practices, service quality, employee satisfaction, employee loyalty, customer satisfaction, cus-tomer loyalty on hotel performance

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Background and Location

The study examined stakeholder attitudes and perceptions towards sustainable tourism in the state of Goa. A sample of multiple-stakeholders who were above the age of 18 years, which included 1000 domestic and international tourists who visited the state of Goa as well as 1000 local residents comprising residents engaged in tourism businesses, not engaged in tourism businesses, entrepreneurs engaged in the tourism sector as well as government officials employed in the tourism sector. In total, four types of stakeholders are surveyed, viz., tourists, residents, entrepreneurs, and government officials.

Questionnaire Development

A modified structured questionnaire appropriate for the state of Goa was developed based on previous similar research studies carried out by Byrd et al., 2008; Kruja and Hasaj, 2010; Quintano et al., 2011; Ong Smith, 2013. The questionnaire had four parts, Part I with biographical details and Part IV with tourism sustainability issues was used for this research paper. Part IV included 44 items or statements covering aspects of sustainable tourism such as the (a) understanding of sustainability, (b) focus of sustainable tourism, (c) sustainable tourism management, (d) participation in sustainable tourism development, (e) support for sustainable tourism development, (f) economic focus of sustainable tourism, and (g) tourism industry and sustainability. Each statement was represented on a five point Likert scale as recommended by Maddox (1985), where 1 represented a response of “strongly disagree”, 5

represented a response of “strongly agree” and 3 represented the “neutral” point.

Data Collection and Analysis Techniques

Primary and secondary data was collected for the study. The sample size for the collection of primary data was determined using judgment/convenience sampling method. Of the 2000 questionnaires given out (1000 residents & 1000 tourists), 1657 questionnaires were returned (805 tourists and 852 residents), giving a response rate of 82.8%. However, the total number of usable questionnaires was only 1570 giving a final response rate of 78.5%. Secondary data was collected from relevant research journals; data procured from Department of Tourism (Government of Goa), Goa Tourism Development Corporation (GTDC), other relevant government departments, information was also collected from booklets and other relevant government publications like the Economic Survey etc.

Data collected was analyzed using SPSS 20. Descriptive statistics, mean analysis, factor analysis and structural equation modeling (SEM) were used. Mean analysis was used to find out the mean of stakeholders perceptions about the sustainability of tourism in the state and was obtained from their responses to the tourism sustainability issues statements. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using principal component method with varimax rotation was conducted to gauge stakeholder perceptions and understanding of sustainable tourism. The appropriateness of factor analysis was determined by examining the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s test of sphericity. A value of 0.60 or above from the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy test indicates that the data were adequate for EFA (Tabachnick and Fidel, 1989). In order to ensure that each factor identified by EFA had only one dimension and each attribute loaded only on


Understanding Sustainability (US)

Sustainable Tourism

Focus on Sustainable Tourism (SF)

Sustainable Tourism Management (STM)

Participation in Sustainable Tourism (PST)

Support for Sustainable Tourism (AST)

Economic Focus on Sustainable Tourism (EFST)

Tourism Industry and Sustainability (TIS)

Figure 2: Hypothesized Model of Multi-stakeholder Perception and Support for Sustainable Tourism

one factor, attributes that had factor loadings of lower than 0.40 and attributes loading on more than one factor with a loading score of equal to or greater than 0.40 on each factor were eliminated from the analysis (Hattie, 1985). After identifying the dimensions, a Cronbach’s Alpha reliability test was conducted to evaluate the reliability of each measurement scale. Structural equation modeling using AMOS 22 was used on the proposed model and a path diagram resulted.

Structural Model: Stakeholder Perception of Sustainable Tourism and their Willingness to Support Sustainable Tourism

After identifying the stakeholders perception of sustainable tourism, the influence of these perceptions on their willingness to support sustainable tourism was assessed. The relationship between stakeholder perception and attitude towards sustainable tourism and their consequent support/opposition towards it, is supported by the Theory of Reasoned Action [TRA] (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975; Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980). The theory postulates that individuals are all rational beings who ensure possession of all pertinent information and who evaluate all possible repercussions and implications of their actions before deciding to engage in them (Ajzen, 1985).

According to TRA, the factor most pertinent to the prediction of behaviour is the intention of the individual which inturn is the antecedent of actual behaviour. The term ‘intention’ includes all the motivational factors that affect behaviour and indicate how much effort an individula will be willing to put in inorder to engage in that behaviour. Ultimately the

theory states that the more favorable an individuals attitude or perception is towards a behaviour, the more (s) he intends to perform it.

Based on this theoretical concept, an exploratory structural model was constructed to test the validity of the seven factor measurement scale representing stakeholder perception


of tourism sustainability in the state of Goa, wherein the seven factors were examined as exogenous variables and sustainable tourism was examined as an endogenous variable. The model was used to test the following hypothesis:

H1: There is no significant relationship between a) Understanding of Sustainability (US) b) Focus on Sustainable Tourism (SF) c) Sustainable Tourism Management (STM) d) Participation in Sustainable Tourism (PST) e) Support for Sustainable Tourism Development (AST) f) Economic Focus on Sustainable Tourism (EFST) g) Tourism Industry and Sustainability (TIS) and

Sustainable Tourism (ST) with respect to Stakeholder perception

RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between stakeholder perception of sustainability and

sustainable tourism. To this end data was collected from stakeholders in the state of Goa and was analyzed using a range of techniques including Structural Equation Modeling (SEM).

Demographic profile of Respondents

Of the 1570 stakeholders (respondents) who completed the survey (Refer Figure 2), the largest percentage of stakeholders were youngsters in the age group 18-27 years (28.5%), followed by those in the age group 28-37 (24.7%) and 38-47 (20.8%). The percentage of males and females surveyed were approximately equal with males accounting for 49.6% and females 50.4%. In terms of education, the largest number of respondents 47.6% reported graduation as their level of education, followed by post graduation at 21.1% and HSSC/ Pre-University at 15.5%. Age and education level indicating that youngsters having high level of education are able to understand the concept of sustainability in a better way. With respect to marital status, 53.9% of respondents were married and 46% were single.

Demography # % Demography # %Age Education

18-27 447 28.5 SSC & below 104 6.628-37 388 24.7 HSSC/Pre University 244 15.538-47 326 20.8 Graduate / Bachelors 748 47.648-57 263 16.8 Post Graduate / Masters 332 21.158 & Above 146 9.3 Professional 142 9.0

Gender Marital StatusMale 778 49.6 Married 846 53.9Female 792 50.4 Single 724 46.1

Stakeholder Category LocationTourist 761 48.5 North Goa 822 52.4Resident 589 37.5 South Goa 748 47.6Entrepreneur (Tourism) 118 7.5Government (Tourism) 102 6.5

Figure 3: Demographic Characteristics of Respondents (N=1570)

Source: Compiled from Primary data

Further, in terms of stakeholder category, tourists constituted 48.5%, residents were 37.5%, entrepreneurs involved in tourism businesses were 7.5% and government employees involved in tourism were 6.5%. The lowest response rate from entrepreneurs and Government officials indicates the lethargic attitude towards providing their opinion about

sustainability status of tourism in Goa. Though these two stakeholders are directly getting the benefits from tourism, they are not bothered about providing their opinion about sustainability. In terms of location, 52.4% were from North Goa while 47.6% were from South Goa.


Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) & Mean Analysis

EFA of the original 52 items on the sustainability issues scale using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) with Varimax Rotation generated 7 factors with 44 variables in total, after items cross loading on two or more factors and those which loaded less than 0.40, were removed. The overall scale reliability of the sustainability issues scale (44 items) with N= 1570, (Refer Figure 4) had a very high overall alpha coefficient of 0.924, with subscales: a) Understanding of Sustainability

– US (8 items; α = 0.884) b) Focus of Sustainable Tourism

– FST (9 items; α = 0.848) c) Sustainable Tourism Management

– STM (7 items; α = 0.761) d) Attitude Towards Sustainable Tourism

– AST (5 items; α = 0.802) e) Participation in Sustainable Tourism Development

– PSTD (5items; α = 0.752) f) Economic Focus of Sustainable Tourism

– EFST (4items; α = 0.726) g) Tourism Industry and Sustainability

– TIS (6 items; α = 0.639)

Mean analysis (Refer Figure 4, last column) indicated a scale mean value of 4.05 for Factor 1 - Understanding of Sustainability (US). However, 3 statements, viz., Economic growth and viability involving long term view (3.97), Environmental care along with consideration for visitors

(3.93), Carrying capacity considerations and using codes of practice (3.88) are slightly below average. The first two could be indicative of a shift in perception of sustainability from the commonly considered economic and environmental perspective while the third may be as a result of lack of clarity about the concept of carrying capacity. With respect to Factor 2 - Focus on Sustainable Tourism (SF) with a scale mean value 4.18 showed 5 statements out of 9 showing slightly below average, viz., The protection of wildlife breeding colonies (4.14), The quality of visitor experience (4.10), The reduction of disturbance of the attractions (4.05), Organized regional plans for tourism (4.00), and Consultation between government, industry, and local residents (4.17).

In terms of Factor 3- Sustainable Tourism Management (STM) with scale mean of 4.04, showed 3 items out of 7 are having slightly below average values. Administration of Sustainability legislation should be the responsibility of Local and Regional Government (3.92), Tourism Industry has the greatest role to play in implementing Sustainable Tourism development policy (3.93) and Marketing is a useful tool for Sustainable Tourism development (3.93) are indicative of the need for combined action from stakeholders to bring about Sustainable Tourism Management. With respect to Factor 4 – Participation in Sustainable Tourism (PST) with scale mean 4.16 showed 3 out of 5 factors having above average perceptions. Help ensure implementation of Code of Conduct to guarantee Sustainable Tourism (3.98) though below average, is tending towards the highest end of the scale and could possibly be because of lack of clarity of the concept ‘Code of Conduct’. The one which is almost closer to the average is, Help promote cultural appreciation and understanding (4.14).

Tourism Sustainability Issues (44 items, N = 1570, Scale alpha= 0.924)

FactorLabel

FactorLoading

SD1

D2

N3

A4

SA5

[F1] Understanding of Sustainability Scale Mean = 4.05, alpha = 0.884, 8 items, Eigen value = 9.973 % of Variance explained = 22.66Environmental care involving a need for economic growth & vi-ability

S1 .770 0.5 2.0 16.8 53.1 27.7 4.05

Environmental care involving a long-term view S2 .769 0.8 2.8 17.3 42.6 36.5 4.11Economic growth and viability involving a long-term view S4 .768 0.7 3.7 21.8 45.7 28.2 3.97Resource and environmental management S5 .751 1.1 2.7 13.5 45.2 37.5 4.15Environmental care with consideration for social factors. S0 .738 1.5 3.1 17.8 48.4 29.3 4.01Maintaining and preserving resources for future generations S7 .728 2.1 2.6 12.4 30.5 52.4 4.28Carrying capacity considerations & using codes of practice S6 .711 0.7 4.0 26.7 43.6 25.0 3.88Environmental care along with consideration for visitors S3 .702 0.6 4.1 20.6 51.3 23.4 3.93[F2] Focus of Sustainable Tourism Scale Mean = 4.18, alpha = 0. 848, 9 items Eigen value = 2.697 % of Variance explained = 6.130The protection of high scenic value SF2 .780 0.2 2.3 10.2 46.8 40.6 4.25The reduction of damage to the physical environment SF3 .771 0.1 1.8 10.4 41.1 46.5 4.32The protection of wildlife breeding colonies SF0. .742 0.8 2.0 17.1 42.6 37.5 4.14The protection of areas of high habitat value SF4 .675 0.5 2.0 12.6 47.5 37.3 4.19The quality of the visitor experience SF1 .610 0.5 1.3 15.0 53.9 29.2 4.10The reduction of disturbance of the attraction SF5 .576 0.2 3.3 20.3 46.1 30.1 4.05Preservation and conservation of all resources SF11 .537 0.1 1.9 10.4 36.1 51.7 4.37


Tourism Sustainability Issues (44 items, N = 1570, Scale alpha= 0.924)

FactorLabel

FactorLoading

SD1

D2

N3

A4

SA5

Organized regional plans for tourism. SF9 .513 0.2 3.4 19.3 50.6 26.5 4.00Consultation between Government, Industry and Local Residents SF10 .420 0.7 2.0 15.8 42.4 39.2 4.17[F3] Sustainable Tourism Management Scale Mean = 4.04, alpha = 0.761, 7 items, Eigen value = 2.520 % of Variance explained = 5.726Long term sustainability of tourism is the priority GAT3 .711 0.9 3.5 18.3 42.5 34.8 4.07Education of tourism staff is important in the implementation of sustainable tourism practices

GAT10 .705 0.6 1.3 11.6 45.2 41.3 4.25

Administration of sustainability legislation should be the respon-sibility of local and Regional Government

GAT8 .663 0.2 3.6 27.1 50.3 22.7 3.92

Sustainable tourism development should encourage the spread of tourists throughout the country.

GAT4 .652 0.2 3.9 18.6 49.4 28.0 4.01

The tourism industry has the greatest role to play in implementing sustainable tourism development policy

GAT13 .562 0.5 3.0 22.5 41.1 22.8 3.93

Marketing is a useful tool for sustainable tourism development GAT14 .526 1.0 4.6 21.5 46.1 26.9 3.93Tourism must be carefully managed in order for it to be sustain-able

GAT1 .497 0.5 1.2 10.9 52.5 34.9 4.20

[F4] Participation in Sustainable Tourism Scale Mean = 4.16, alpha = 0.802, 5 items, Eigen value = 2.304 % of Variance explained = 5.237Help improve the quality of community life PT5 .823 0.3 2.4 12.4 50.4 34.5 4.16Help support the maintenance & improvement of Goa’s environ-ment & heritage

PT2 .749 0.4 2.2 10.7 46.1 40.6 4.24

Help strengthen respect for Goa’s natural areas and historic places PT1 .733 0.1 1.7 8.8 47.8 41.6 4.29Help promote cultural appreciation and understanding PT4 .694 0.2 1.8 13.7 52.2 32.2 4.14Help ensure implementation of code of conduct to guarantee sus-tainable tourism

PT7 .589 0.8 3.8 20.3 47.1 28.2 3.98

[F5] Support for Sustainable Tourism Development Scale Mean = 4.02, alpha = 0.752, 5 items, Eigen value = 1.531 % of Variance explained = 3.479Willing to participate in management of local resources SSTD2 .810 1.2 3.9 21.1 49.6 24.1 3.92Willing to contribute to ensure greater benefits to community SSTD3 .741 0.5 2.7 19.2 44.8 32.8 4.07Willing to participate in sustainable tourism decision making SSTD4 .730 0.4 3.1 15.8 46.4 34.3 4.11Willing to contribute to protection & conservation of resources SSTD1 .723 0.3 3.2 17.3 50.6 28.6 4.04Willing to contribute to funding and management of solutions for tourism related problems

SSTD5 .515 0.6 3.3 20.1 49.0 27.0 3.99

[F6]Economic Focus Of Sustainable Tourism Scale Mean = 3.78, alpha = 0.726, 4 items, Eigen value = 1.474 % of Variance explained = 3.351Attracting more high spending domestic tourists SF13 .776 2.5 8.0 31.1 32.1 26.3 3.72Attracting more high spending foreign tourists SF1 .763 1.1 5.2 24.5 36.9 32.2 3.94Tourism Industry should focus on attracting more Foreign Tour-ists.

TI 3 .652 1.7 10.1 22.0 39.6 26.7 3.80

The number of tourists visiting Goa should be increased. TI 9 .612 2.6 11.3 25.0 38.7 22.3 3.67[F7] Tourism Industry and Sustainability Scale Mean = 3.65, alpha = 0.639, 6 items, Eigen value = 1.335 % of Variance explained = 3.304Tourism needs greater industry control. TI 5 .607 1.5 6.5 24.5 46.2 21.3 3.79Tourism is inherently sustainable GAT 0 .604 2.7 11.0 33.8 41.9 10.6 3.47Tourism in the most developed locations is unsustainable. TI 7 .590 2.0 14.3 39.6 34.7 9.5 3.35Tourism needs greater Government control TI 1 .587 2.9 6.1 17.0 42.8 31.1 3.93Tourism is more sustainable than other industries. TI 6 .572 1.5 6.5 24.5 46.2 21.3 3.57Tourism needs greater local resident control. TI 8 .464 1.2 5.8 23.7 49.4 19.9 3.81KMO = 0.910; Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity = 23874.558; df = 948; p = 0.000**

Figure 4: Tourism Sustainability Issues Scale (44 items, N= 1570) Rotated Factor Matrix (Loadings<.40 suppressed)

Source: Compiled from Primary data

In terms of Factor 5 – Support for Sustainable Tourism Development (AST) with scale mean 4.02; have 3 of the 5 items having above average values. Willingness to participate in management of local resources (3.92) and Willingness to contribute


to funding and management of solutions for tourism related problems (3.99), though slightly below average, is tending towards the highest end indicating a slightly lower support for Sustainable Tourism initiatives. This could perhaps be attributed to the large number of tourists surveyed as stakeholders, which, given the fact that tourists do not have as great an attachment to the destination as residents, entrepreneurs and government officials is understandable and explainable.

Factor 6 - Economic focus on Sustainable Tourism (EFST) with a scale mean of 3.78 indicates an average perception of where the economic focus of sustainable tourism should lie. However, given that 2 of the 4 statements, viz., Attracting more high spending foreign tourists (3.94) and Attracting more foreign tourists (3.80) have the highest values in this scale or factor, perhaps a shift in focus to attracting foreign tourists to the destination is seen as an economic path to sustainability. Finally with respect to Factor 7 - Tourism industry and Sustainability (TIS), the scale mean is 3.65 (the lowest among all other factors). However, 3 of the 6 statements which have the highest means refer to the aspect of control for sustainability. Tourism needs greater industry control (3.79); Tourism needs greater Government control (3.93); Tourism needs greater local resident control (3.81) seem to indicate that the tourism industry needs the concerted control of all 3 major players- government, industry and local residents for sustainability.

Structural Model / Path Design

In SEM, the development of the hypothetical model depicting the linkages between the latent constructs and their empirically observed indicators is considered as a Measurement Model, while the theoretical relationship between constructs is referred to as a Structural Model (Bollen, 1989a; Bollen, 1989b; Joreskog, 1993; Byrne 1998). An analysis of the estimated standard path coefficients in the Measurement Model, carried out using Maximum Likelihood Method of Estimation, revealed the strength, significance and direction of each hypothesized relationship.

A SEM Model was used to examine the hypothesized relationships between the constructs (factors) in the model using Maximum Likelihood Estimates. Model fit was initially tested using the Overall Fit and Regression Paths to determine whether observed variables were generated by corresponding latent factors. The hypothesized model was then analysed. Figure 5 shows the standardized path diagram as estimated by AMOS 22. Each of the observed variables is displayed as a rectangle while each of the latent constructs is shown as an oval. The evaluation of Goodness of Fit indices indicate mediocre to acceptable levels of fit; viz.;


In terms of Factor 5 – Support for Sustainable Tourism Development (AST) with scale mean 4.02; have 3 of the 5 items having above average values. Willingness to participate in management of local resources (3.92) and Willingness to contribute to funding and management of solutions for tourism related problems (3.99), though slightly below average, is tending towards the highest end indicating a slightly lower support for Sustainable Tourism initiatives. This could perhaps be attributed to the large number of tourists surveyed as stakeholders, which, given the fact that tourists do not have as great an attachment to the destination as residents, entrepreneurs and government officials is understandable and explainable.

Factor 6 - Economic focus on Sustainable Tourism (EFST) with a scale mean of 3.78 indicates an average perception of where the economic focus of sustainable tourism should lie. However, given that 2 of the 4 statements, viz., Attracting more high spending foreign tourists (3.94) and Attracting more foreign tourists (3.80) have the highest values in this scale or factor, perhaps a shift in focus to attracting foreign tourists to the destination is seen as an economic path to sustainability. Finally with respect to Factor 7 - Tourism industry and Sustainability (TIS), the scale mean is 3.65 (the lowest among all other factors). However, 3 of the 6 statements which have the highest means refer to the aspect of control for sustainability. Tourism needs greater industry control (3.79); Tourism needs greater Government control (3.93); Tourism needs greater local resident control (3.81)

seem to indicate that the tourism industry needs the concerted control of all 3 major players- government, industry and local residents for sustainability.

Structural Model / Path Design

In SEM, the development of the hypothetical model depicting the linkages between the latent constructs and their empirically observed indicators is considered as a Measurement Model, while the theoretical relationship between constructs is referred to as a Structural Model (Bollen, 1989a; Bollen, 1989b; Joreskog, 1993; Byrne 1998). An analysis of the estimated standard path coefficients in the Measurement Model, carried out using Maximum Likelihood Method of Estimation, revealed the strength, significance and direction of each hypothesized relationship.

A SEM Model was used to examine the hypothesized relationships between the constructs (factors) in the model using Maximum Likelihood Estimates. Model fit was initially tested using the Overall Fit and Regression Paths to determine whether observed variables were generated by corresponding latent factors. The hypothesized model was then analysed. Figure 5 shows the standardized path diagram as estimated by AMOS 22. Each of the observed variables is displayed as a rectangle while each of the latent constructs is shown as an oval. The evaluation of Goodness of Fit indices indicate mediocre to acceptable levels of fit; viz.;

Figure 5: Standardized Estimated Path Diagram Indicating Significance at p<0.05 Level (Dashed Lines Indicate Paths Not Significant at p<0.05 Level)

Figure 5: Standardized Estimated Path Diagram Indicating Significance at p<0.05 Level (Dashed Lines Indicate Paths Not Significant at p<0.05 Level)


Chi square/df (CMIN) = 4.801 which is acceptable. The acceptable ratio ranges from as high a 5.0 (Wheaton et al., 1977) to as low as 2.0 (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007);

Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) = 0.883; and Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI) = 0.871; both of which are in the acceptable range as values of 0.90 or greater indicate well fitting models. (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007);

Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = 0.049; Values below 0.8 show good fit (MacCallum et al., 1996). Recently values closer to 0.6 (Hu and Bentler, 1999) or stringent upper limit of 0.7 (Steiger, 2007) seem to be the general consensus.

Root Mean Square residual (RMR) = 0.035 is a good fit where values < 0.05 are indicative of a good fit (Byrne, 1998; Diamantopolous and Sigaw, 2000)

Normed- Fit Index (NFI) = 0.822; mediocre to acceptable; while cutoffs as low as 0.80 have been proffered as acceptable, Hu and Bentler, 1999, suggest >=0.90 as acceptable and >= 0.95 as a good fit.

Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = 0.853, mediocre; while values >= 0.90 were initially advanced as acceptable, Hu and Bentler, 1999, suggest that values>= 0.90 are necessary in order to ensure that misspecified models are not accepted and values >= 0.95 as considered a good fit.

As the Goodness of Fit Indices do not support the proposed model completely, the measurement model is retained as a path diagram indicating relationships between Sustainability Issue factors and Sustainable Tourism (Refer Figure 6).

Hypothesis Hypothesis Path Path Coefficient P value Accept / RejectH1 a US ST 0.65 0.00** AcceptH1 b SF ST 0.84 0.00** AcceptH1 c STM ST 0.84 0.00** AcceptH1 d AST ST 0.80 0.00** AcceptH1 e PST ST -0.02 0.571 RejectH1 f EFST ST 0.53 0.00** AcceptH1 g TIS ST 0.57 0.00** Accept

Figure 6: Summary of Hypotheses Test Results

CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this research was to test the model of stakeholder perceptions about sustainable tourism and their consequent support for sustainable tourism by examining the path relationship between factors related to sustainability and sustainable tourism. Six of the seven factors included in the hypothesis are accepted at the p<0.05 level of significance. Focus of Sustainable Tourism & Sustainable Tourism Management (0.84 each), along with Attitude towards Sustainable Tourism (0.80) indicate a high positive association with Sustainable Tourism. Understanding of Sustainability (0.65) shows an above average positive association with Sustainable Tourism. Tourism Industry & Sustainability (0.57) and Economic Focus of Sustainable Tourism (0.53) show a positive, moderate association with Sustainable Tourism.

Finally, only with respect to Participation in Sustainable Tourism (-0.02) shows a low, negative relation to Sustainable Tourism. The null hypothesis stating that there is no significant relationship between Participation in Sustainable tourism Development and Sustainable Tourism

is rejected. A possible explanation for this could be that even when stakeholders in a destination have an awareness, understanding and positive attitude toward sustainable tourism, when it comes to actual involvement of their time, efforts and resources, commitments are lacking.

Limitations of the Research

Several limitations were observed in this study including the questions asked in the survey, the nature of the sample, the procedures for data collection, the ability of the proposed model to explain stakeholder attitudes to sustainable tourism, to name but a few. The survey was designed to explore stakeholder perceptions in terms of different factors relating to sustainable tourism in the state of Goa. The stakeholders’ ability to convey their attitudes and perceptions was related to their understanding of the survey statements which included technical terms and which could affect their responses. Further, stakeholders seemed fairly comfortable with the existing model of Mass tourism in the state which has existed for over thirty odd years and are less familiar with the relatively newer concept and characteristics of sustainable tourism.


Recommendations for Future Research

Despite the limitations, this study proves useful in understanding the attitudes of stakeholders towards sustainable tourism. While the Path Diagram which resulted provides a valid basis for the implementation of the Multi- Stakeholder Involvement Model (MSIM) Framework for sustainable tourism in the state, further research need to be carried out in this context to transform it into an acceptable model and to provide inputs for the understanding of the non-significant relationship between Participation in Sustainable Tourism Development and Sustainable Tourism. Further analysis between the demographic variables and stakeholder attitude toward sustainable tourism could do much to align the goals the Industry, Government, Entrepreneurs and Residents in this regard.

REFERENCES

Aas, C., Ladkin, A., & Fletcher, J. (2005). Stakeholder col-laboration and heritage management. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 28-48.

Aguera, F. O. (2013). Stakeholder theory as a model for sus-tainable development in eco- Tourism. TURyDES, 6(15)

Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to action: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl, & J. Beckmenn (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior, pp. 11-39. New York: Springer.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Akis, S., Peristianis, N., & Warner, J. (1996). Residents’ attitudes to tourism development: The case of Cyprus. Tourism Management, 17(7), 481-494.

Al-Rafaie, A. (2015). Effects of human resource manage-ment on hotel performance using structural equation mod-eling. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 293-303

Arsezen-Otamis, P., & Yuzbasioglu, N., (2013). Analysis of Antalya Tourism Cluster Perceived Performance with Structural Equation Model, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 99, 682-690

Assante, L. M., Wen, H. I., & Lottig, K. (2012). An empirical assessment of residents’ attitudes for sustainable tourism development: a case study of O‘ahu, Hawai‘I. Journal of Sustainability and Green Business.

Back, K. J. ( 2012 ). Hotel Brand Loyalty: A Longitudinal Analysis of Four Stage Brand Loyalty Model APTA 2012, Taipei, 26th-29th June 2012 Hospitality & Tourism Education: New Tourism & New Waves,

Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Falk, J., (2011). Visitors’ learn-ing for environmental sustainability: Testing short- and long-term impacts of wildlife tourism experiences using

structural equation modeling. Tourism Management, 32, 1243-1252

Berry, S., & Ladkin, A. (1997). Sustainable tourism: a re-gional perspective. Tourism Management, 18(7), 433-440.

Bollen, K. (1989a). Structural equations with latent vari-ables. New York: Wiley.

Bollen, K. (1989b). A new incremental fit index for general structural models. Sociological Methods and Research, 17, 303-316.

Bramwell, B., Henry, I., Jackson, G., & Van der Straaten, J. (1996). Sustainable tourism management: Principles and practices. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.

Bramwell, B., & Sharman, A. (1999). Collaboration in Local Tourism Policy-making. Annals of Tourism Research, 26, 392-415.

Butler, R.V. (1990) Alternative tourism: Pious hope or Trojan Horse? Journal of Travel Research, 28(3), 91-6.

Butler, R. W. (1999). Sustainable tourism: A state-of-the art review. Tourism Geographies, 1(1), 7-25.

Butowski, L. (2012) Sustainable Tourism – A Model Approach, Visions for Global Tourism Industry. Retrieved from www.intechopen.com

Byrd, E. T. (2003). An analysis of variables that influence stakeholder participation and support for sustainable tour-ism development in rural North Carolina. Unpublished PhD thesis: North Carolina State University

Byrd, E. T. (2007). Stakeholders in sustainable tourism de-velopment and their roles applying stakeholder theory to sustainable tourism development. Tourism Review, 62(2), 6-13.

Byrd, E. T., Cardenas, D. A. & Greenwood, J. B. (2008), Factors of stakeholder understanding of tourism: the case of Eastern North Carolina. Tourism & Hospitality Research, 8(3), 192

Byrd E. t., Bosley H. E., & Dronberger M. G. (2009), Comparisons of stakeholder perceptions of tour-ism impacts in rural eastern North Carolina . Tourism Management, 30(5), 693-703.

Byrne, B. M. (1998). Structural equation modeling with LISREL, PRELIS, and SIMPLIS: Basic concepts, ap-plications, and programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Camus, S., Hikkerova, L., & Sahut, J. M. (2014), Systemic Analysis and Model of Sustainable Tourism, Working Paper. Retrieved from http://www.ipag.fr/fr/accueil/la-recherche/publications-WP.html

Castellanos, V. M., & Orgaz, A. F. (2013). Ecotourism Potential in the Dominican Republic. TURyDES. Retrieved from http://www.eumed.net/rev/turydes/14/ecoturism.html


Chang, L.-Y., & Liu, W. (2009). Temple fairs in Taiwan: Environmental strategies and competitive advantage for cultural tourism. Tourism Management, 30(6), 900-904.

Clarke, T. (1997). Stakeholder communications. Journal of Communication Management, 2(3), 206-207.

Collins A. 1999. Tourism development and natural capital. Annals of Tourism Research, 26, 98-109

Cooper, C., Scott, N., & Baggio, R. (2009). Network position and perceptions of destination stakeholder importance. An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 20(1), 33-45.

Currie, R. R., Seaton, S., & Wesley, F. (2009). Determining stakeholders for feasibility analysis. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(1), 41-63.

Deng, Q. & Li, M. (2013), A model of event–destination im-age transfer. Journal of Travel Research 53(1), 69-82

Dewhurst, H., & Thomas, R. (2003). Encouraging sustain-able business practices in a non-regulatory environment: a case study of small tourism firms in a UK national park. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(5), 383-403.

Diamantopoulos, A. and Siguaw, J.A. (2000), Introducing LISREL. London: Sage Publications.

Dodds, R. (2007). Sustainable tourism and policy imple-mentation: lessons from the case of Calvia, Spain. Current Issues in Tourism, 10(1), 296-322.

Dodds, R., & Butler, R. W. (2009). Inaction more than action: barriers to the implementation of sustainable tourism poli-cies. In S. Gossling, C. M. Hall, & D. B. Weaver (Eds.), Sustainable tourism futures: Perspectives on systems, restructuring and innovations (pp. 43e57). Abingdon: Routledge.

Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and impli-cations. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), pp 65–91.

Dritsakis, N. (2004). Tourism as a long-run economic growth factor: An empirical investigation for Greece using cau-sality analysis. Tourism Economics, 10(3), 305-316.

Durydiwka M., Kowalczyk A. & Kulczyk S. (2010). Tourism development: determinants & plans’, In: Turystyka zrównoważona, Kowalczyk (ed.), amu.edu.pl/tomy/tir6.pdf 21–43

Dyer, P., Gursoy, D., Sharma, B., & Carter, J. (2007). Structural modeling of resident perceptions of tourism and associated development on the Sunshine Coast, Australia.Tourism Management, 28, 409-422.

Elkington, J., (1998) “Accounting for the Triple Bottom Line”, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 2( 3), 18 - 22

Fennell, D. (1999). Ecotourism: An introduction. London: Routledge.

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakehold-er approach. Boston: Pitman.

Friedman, A. L., & Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholders: Theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Getz, D., & Timur, S. (2005). Stakeholder involvement in sustainable tourism: balancing the voices. In W. Theobald (Ed.), Global tourism (3rd ed.). 230-247 Oxford: Butterworth Heinmann.

Gross, M., & Brown, G. (2008). An empirical structural model of tourists and places: progressing involvement and place attachment into tourism. Tourism Management, 29(6), 1141–1151.

Hair, J., Anderson, R., Tatham, R., & Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.

Hall, C. M. (2007). Tourism planning: Policies, processes and relationships. Harlow: Prentice Hall.

Hall, C. M., & Lew, A. (Eds.), (1998). Sustainable tourism: A geographical perspective. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.

Hallak, R., Brown, G., Lindsay, N. J., (2012). The Place Identity - Performance relationship among tourism en-trepreneurs: A structural equation modelling analysis. Tourism Management, 33, 143-154

Hardy, A. L., & Beeton, R. J. S. (2001). Sustainable tourism or maintainable tourism: managing resources for more than average outcomes. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9(3), 168–192.

Harris, R., Griffin, T., & Williams, P. (2002). Sustainable tourism: A global perspective. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann

Hardy, A., Beeton, R. J. S., & Pearson, L. (2002). Sustainable tourism: An overview of the concept and its position in relation to conceptualization of tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10, 475–496.

Harrill, R., & Potts, T. (2003). Tourism planning in histor-ic districts. Journal of American Planning Association, 69(3), 233-244.

He, Y., & Song, H. (2009). A mediation model of tourists’ repurchase intentions for packaged tour services. Journal of Travel Research, 47(3), 317–331.

Hopwood B, Mellor M, O’Brien G. (2005)Sustainable de-velopment: mapping different approaches. Sustainable Development 13: 38–52.

Hox, J. J. & Bechger, T. M. (1998), An Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling, Family Science Review, 11: (354-373)


Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria ver-sus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.

Hunter, C. (1997). Sustainable tourism as an adaptive para-digm. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(4), 850–867.

Hunter, C., & Green, H. (1995). Tourism and the environ-ment, a sustainable relationship? London: Routledge.

Huttasin, N. (2008). Perceived social impacts of tourism by residents in the OTOP tourism village, Thailand. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 13(2), 175-191.

Ioannides, D. (1995). A flawed implementation of sustain-able tourism: The experience of Akamas, Cyprus. Tourism Management, 16(8), 583-592.

Jamal, T. B., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 22, 186-204.

Jawahar, I. M., & Mclaughlin, G. L. (2001). Towards a de-scriptive stakeholder theory: An organisational life cy-cle approach. Academy of Management Review, 26(3), 397-414.

Johnston, R., & Tyrrell, T., (2005). A dynamic model of sus-tainable tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 43, 1-11

Jo¨ reskog, K. G. (1967). Some contributions to maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 3, 443-482.

Jo¨ reskog, K. G. (1969). A general approach to confirmatory maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 36, 183–202.

Jo¨ reskog, K. G. (1993). Testing structural equation models. In K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models, 294–316. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.

Jurowski, C., Uysal, M., & Williams, D. R. (1997). A theo-retical analysis of host community resident reactions to tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 36(2), 3 - 11.

Kang, S., Lee, C., Yoon, Y., & Long, P. (2008). Resident per-ception of the impact of limitestakes community-based casino gaming in mature gaming communities. Tourism Management, 29(4), 681-694.

Kelly, J. O. C., Haider W., Williams, P., & Englund, K. (2007). Stated preferences of tourists for ecoefficient des-tination planning options. Tourism Management, 28(2), 377-90.

Keogh, B. (1990). Public participation in community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 17(3), 449-465.

Klem, L. (2000). Structural equation modeling. In L. G. Grimm, & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understand-ing more multivariate statistics, 227–260. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Ko, D.W., & Stewart, W. P. (2002). A structural equation model of residents’ attitudes for tourism development. Tourism Management, 23(5), 521–530

Kristinic, N. M., Ivanovic, S., Drpic, D. (2009), “Spatial planning as the function of sustainability of the island Krk”, Ekonomska istraživanja, 22(2), 98-110.

Kristinic, N. M., & Drpic, D. (2013). Model for sustainable tourism development in croatia tourism in Southern and Eastern Europe, 159-173

Kruja, D., & Hasaj, A., (2010) Comparisons of stakeholders’ perception towards the sustainable tourism development and its impacts in Shkodra Region (Albania). Turizam, 14(1), pp 1-12

Kuvan, Y., & Akan, P. (2005). Residents’ attitudes toward general and forest-related impacts of tourism: The case of Belek, Antalya. Tourism Management, 26(5), 691-706

Ladkin, A., & Bertramini, A. (2002). Collaborative tourism planning: A case study of Cusco, Peru. Current Issues in Tourism, 5, 71-93.

Lee, C. C., & Chang, C. P. (2008). Tourism development and economic growth: A closer look at panels. Tourism Management, 29(1), 180-192.

MacCallum, R. C., Browne, M. W., & Sugawara, H. M. (1996). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 130-49.

Maddox, R. N. (1985). Measuring satisfaction with tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 23(3), 2-5.

Markwick, M. C. (2000). Golf tourism development, stake-holders, differing discourses, and alternative agendas: The case of Malta. Tourism Management, 21(5), 515-524.

Mason, P. (2003). Tourism impacts, planning & manage-ment. Oxford: Butterworth- Heinemann.

Mereiros De Araujo, L., & Bramwell, B. (1999). Stakeholder assessment and collaborative tourism planning: The case of Brazil’s Costa Dourada project. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7(3-4), 356-378.

Miller, G., Rathouse, K., Scarles, C., Holmes, K., & Tribe, J. (2010). Public understanding of sustainable tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(3), 627-645.

Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principles of ‘who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886.

Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (1998). Tourism and Sustainability: New Tourism in the Third World. Routledge, London.

Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (2003). Tourism and sustainabil-ity. London: Routledge.


Nilplub, C., & Khang, D. B, (2012). Examining the Determinants of Tourist Destination Loyalty, APTA 2012, Taipei, 26th-29th June 2012 Hospitality & Tourism Education: New Tourism & New Waves

Norton, B. G. (2005). Sustainability: A philosophy of adap-tive ecosystems. London: The University of Chicago Press.

Nunkoo, R., & Ramkissoon, H. (2011). Developing a com-munity support model for tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(3), 964-988

Okazaki, E. (2008). A community-based tourism model: its conception and use. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(5), 511-529.

Ong T. F., & Musa, G. (2012). Examining the influences of experience, personality and attitude on SCUBA div-ers’ underwater behaviour: A structural equation model. Tourism Management, 33, 1521-1534

Ong, L. T. J., & Smith, R. A., (2013) Perceptions and reality of managing sustainable coastal tourism in emerging des-tinations: The case of Sihanoukville, Cambodia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(2), 256-278

Park, C. W., MacInnis, D. J., Priester, J., Eisingerich, A. B., & Iacobucci, D. (2010). Brand attachment and brand at-titude strength: conceptual and empirical differentiation of two critical brand equity drivers. Journal of Marketing, 74, 1-17.

Polonsky, M. J., & Scott, D. (2005). An empirical examina-tion of the stakeholder strategy matrix. European Journal of Marketing, 39(9-10), 1199-1215.

Pretty, J., (1995). The many interpretations of participation. In Focus, 16, 4-5.

Puczko, L., & Ratz, T. (2000). Tourist and resident percep-tions of the physical impacts of tourism at Lake Balaton, Hungary: Issues for sustainable tourism management. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(6), 458-477.

Quintano, C., Pagliuca, M. M., & Rosciano, M., (2011). Comparisons of Stakeholder Perceptions of Sustainable Tourism in Naples. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 295-304.

Ramkissoon, H., Smith, L. D. G., & Weiler, B. (2013). Testing the dimensionality of place attachment and its re-lationships with place satisfaction and pro-environmental behaviours: A structural equation modeling approach. Tourism Management, 36, 552-566

Robson, J., & Robson, I. (1996). From shareholders to stake-holders: Critical issues for tourism marketers. Tourism Management, 17(7), 533-540.

Romão, J., Neuts, B., Peter Nijkamp, P., & Asami Shikida, A. (2014). Determinants of trip choice, satisfaction and loyalty in an eco-tourism destination: A modelling study

on the Shiretoko Peninsula, Japan. Ecological Economics, 107, 195-205

Ryan, C. (2002). Equity, management, power sharing and sustainability-issues of the new tourism. Tourism Management, 23(1), 17-26.

Schumacker, R., & Lomax, R. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Sharpley, R. (2000). Tourism and sustainable development: Exploring the theoretical divide. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(1).

Shikida, A., Yoda, M., Kino, A., Morishige, M. (2010) Tourism relationship model and intermediary for sustain-able tourism management: Case study of the Kiritappu Wetland Trust in Hamanaka, Hokkaido. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 10(2), 105-115

Southgate, C., & Sharpley, R. (2002). Tourism, development and the environment. In R. Sharpley, & D. J. Telfer (Eds.), Tourism and development: Concepts and issues, 231-262. Cleveland, OH: Channel View Publications.

Steiger, J. H. (2007). Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modeling. Personality and Individual Differences, 42(5), 893-98.

Stoddard, J., Evans, M., & Dave, D. (2008). Sustainable Tourism: The case of the blue ridge National Heritage Area. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 49(3), 245-257.

Swarbrooke, J. (1998). Sustainable tourism management. Wallingford: New York, CABI Publishing.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivari-ate statistics (5th ed.) New York: Allyn and Bacon.

Tubb, K. (2003). An evaluation of the effectiveness of in-terpretation within Dartmoor National Park in reaching the goals of sustainable tourism development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,11(6), 476-98.

Timur, S., & Getz, D. (2009). Sustainable tourism develop-ment: how do destination stakeholders perceive sustain-able urban tourism? Sustainable Development, 17(4), 220-232.

Vargas-Sa´nchez, A., Porras-Bueno, N., & Plaza-Mejı´a, M. A. (2011), Explaining Residents’ Attitudes to Tourism.: Is a universal model possible? Annals of Tourism Research, 38(2), 460-480.

Vernon, J., Essex, S., Pinder, D., & Curry, K. (2005). Collaborative policymaking: local sustainable projects. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(2), 325-345.

Waligo, V. M., Clarke, J., & Hawkins, R., (2013), Implementing Sustainable Tourism: A Multi-Stakeholder Involvement Management Framework, Tourism Management, 36, 342-353

Wall, G., & Mathieson, A., 2006. Tourism: Change, Impacts and Opportunities. Pearson, Essex.


World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Weaver D.B. (2001). Ecotourism in the context of other tour-ism types, In: The encyclopedia of ecotourism, Weaver (ed.), CABI Publishing, Oxon-New York, 73–83

Weaver, D. B. (2000). Sustainable tourism: is it sustainable? In B. Faulkner, G. Moscard, & E. Laws (Eds.), Tourism in the 21st century: Lessons from experience. London: Continuum.

Weaver, D. (2006). Sustainable tourism: Theory and prac-tice. Elsevier, Oxford.

Weaver, D. B. (2012). Organic incremental and induced paths to sustainable mass tourism convergence. Tourism Management, 33, 1030-1037

Weaver, D. B., & Lawton, L. J. (2004). Visitor attitudes to-ward tourism development and product integration in an Australian urban-rural fringe. Journal of Travel Research, 42, 286-296.

Wheaton, B., Muthen, B., Alwin, D., F., & Summers, G. (1977). Assessing reliability and stability in panel models. Sociological Methodology, 8(1), 84-136.

Wheeller, B. (1991). Tourism’s troubled times: responsible tourism is not the answer. Tourism Management, 12(2), 91-96. .

WTTC. (2010). Progress and priorities: 2009-10. World Travel & Tourism Council. Retrieved from http://www.wttc.org/bin/pdf/original_pdf_file/pandp_

World Tourism Organization (WTO) (Ed.) (2002). Contributions of the World Tourism Organization to the world summit on sustainable development, Johannesburg 2002. Madrid, Spain

World Commission on Environment and Development Report (WCED). (1987). Retrieved from http://www.un-documents.net/a42r187.htm

Xu, F., & Dorothy Fox, D., (2014). Modeling attitudes to nature, tourism and sustainable development in national parks: A survey of visitors in China and the UK. Tourism Management, 45, 142-158

Yoon, Y., Gursoy, D., & Chen, J.S. (2001). Validating a tour-ism development theory with structural equation model-ing. Tourism Management, 22(2), 363-372.

RURAL TOURISM IN INDIA: RELEVANCE, PROSPECTS AND PROMOTIONAL

STRATEGIES

Shikha Kapur*

AbstractAtithi Devo Bhavah is the adage used by the India tourism to lure millions of Tourists from across the globe. Indian villages are unique socio-cultural spaces that vary from one after another but are intertwined on the ethos of this great tradition. Rural Tourism takes place in non-urban settings usually in countryside, offering an elixir to counter tension and “urbanization” syndrome to the weary, stressed out tourists from both within as well as foreign countries to help them relax and rediscover their roots. Since nearly 70% of the India’s population is living in rural areas, it is expected to benefit the local rural communities economically through various opportunities for rural enterprises, income generation and employment. It helps in nurturing rural arts and crafts, rural infrastructure development while simultaneously preserving environment and cultural heritage.

Keywords: Rural Tourism, Tourism in India, Tourists, Incredible India, Ministry of Tourism, Rural Enterprise

INTRODUCTION

अितिथ देवो भवः Atithi Devo Bhavah when translated in English means ‘The Guest is equivalent to God’, is a Sanskrit verse taken from Taittiriya Upanishad an ancient Hindu Scripture. It has become part of the “code of conduct” for our Indian society while taking care of our guests. The Indian Tourism industry uses this very adage in it attempts to lure millions of Tourists from across the globe.

Since the dawn of civilization, man’s wanderlust has taken him to various places. ‘Tourism’ comes from the old Aramaic word “Tur”, and was used for the first time when Moses began his expedition to the lands of Canaán according to the French School, led by A. Houlot (1961).

Travel for pleasure is Tourism. There are many definitions of Tourism that vary from source to source, person to person. The very first definition of tourism was made by Guyer-Feuler in 1905. According to the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) (2010) Tourism comprises the activities of “persons travelling to and staying in places outside their usual environment for not more than one consecutive year for leisure, business and other purposes”.

SALIENT FEATURES OF TOURISM IN INDIA

India is located in South Asia. With an area of 3,287,263 km2, it is the seventh largest country in the world in terms of its size and area. It is also the third largest country in Asia. India offers both religious diversity and tolerance since the major religions of the world viz. Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Sikhism, Jainism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism and Judaism are practised here. It is also the birthplace of major religions like Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism and Buddhism, in the world. Since India is a land of diversities, hosting diversity of culture, race, ethnic groups, languages, religion, traditions, customs, foods, music, dance, architecture, flora and fauna it is one of the most popular tourist destinations of Asia. It is a treasure house of natural resources ranging from the high mountains to the deep valleys, the wide blue black oceans and seas, the brackish lagoons, the peaceful scenic backwaters, the picturesque expansive deserts and the lush green, deep and dense forests along with man made monuments, forts, palaces, estates, museums, resorts and places of religious interest. The rich hospitality, unique culture and a variety of cuisines that each place offers, adds to the tourism experience. India offers all types of tourism opportunities to the global tourist and naturally attracts

* Senior Assistant Professor, Department of Adult and Continuing Education & Extension, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi, India.Email: [email protected]


Rural Tourism in India: Relevance, Prospects and Promotional Strategies 41

tourists from across the globe. No matter what the interests, the Indian tourism industry has something to offer to all the tourists coming here.

It was way back in 1958 that Department of Tourism under the Ministry of Transport and Communications was setup. It aimed at giving impetus to tourism in India through policy formulation and programs for promotion of tourism in the country. Department of Tourism controls tourism in India at the centre. It mentors all the rules, laws and regulations related to the development, administration and promotion of tourism in India and making it a prime destination for tourists from across the globe!

EVOLUTION OF INDIAN TOURISM THROUGH THE FIVE YEAR PLANS

The Indian economy is objectively planned through Five Year Plans in India. Indian planners sidelined the Tourism and its development in its 1st 5-year plan (1951-56). Tourism was made a state subject. No separate allocation was made for the tourism sector. In the second 5-Year Plan Rs 336.39 lakhs were kept aside for tourism. Separate allocations were made for the State and Centre Plans for development of accommodation and transportation for the tourists. By the time 3rd Five Year Plan was ushered in, the potential of tourism in the growth and development of India was established. The 800 lakhs allocated during this Plan were used for development of accommodation, transportation and roads. The 4th Plan emphasised on developing various Tourist destinations so that they could bear the influx of tourist traffic. During the 5th Plan 133 crores INR were allocated for integrated development of elected areas, along with development of accommodation and transportation & promotion of tourism abroad.

The 6th Plan emphasised development of sustainable tourism and airport infrastructure. During the 7th Plan Tourism was accorded the status of Industry and 326.16 crores were allocated to it. By the 8th Plan 15 States and 3 States had accorded Industry status to tourism. Courses in Universities on Travel and Tourism, recognition of public sector enterprises, use of communications and computer in development of tourism were realized in this Plan. (Fazili and Ashraf, 2006; Five Year Plans, GOI).

Major changes took place from the 10th Plan onwards. The government realized that Tourism was an important engine for the economic development of the nation and hence put forth ‘National Tourism Development Policy’ in place in 2002. Incredible India (styled as Incredıble!ndıa) became the international marketing campaign of Government of India to promote Indian tourism industry for the global audience in the same year. New trends in tourism viz. rural tourism and ethnic tourism were incorporated, along with wellness & health

tourism, spiritual tourism, eco tourism and adventure tourism.

In the 11th Plan INR 3112.71 crores were sanctioned for tourism to make it an engine of economic development. This Plan emphasised on rural tourism, infrastructure projects and human resource development (Annual Report, 2010-2011).‘Hunar se Rozgar’ (Skill to employment) Programme was initiated in 2009-10. It intended to create employable skills among youth belonging to economically weaker sections of the society between the ages 18-25 years (In November, 2010 upper age limit raised to 28 years). During this Plan Rural Tourism projects were sanctioned in 186 villages located in 29 States/Union Territories by the Ministry of Tourism. Fifty six of these sites were located in the North-Eastern region. This program continued in the 12th Plan. Under this initiative 21,175 persons were trained by 31 January 2013 for the year 2012-13 (Annual Report, 2012-2013).

The Tourism Ministry adopted Publicity and marketing strategies and started participating in important tourist generating markets (emerging as well as potential) such as major international Travel Fairs and Exhibitions to showcase and promote Indian tourism. Since November 2014 ‘Visa on Arrival’ facility has been introduced for International Visitors entering/visiting India from 43 different countries. This is another strategy to promote tourism and boost the GDP of the country that has been initiated. The emphasis in the current Plan is on ‘Rural Tourism Cluster’ or developing a cluster of villages of the country for Tourism promotion.

TOURISM AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN INDIAN

The Indian Travel and Tourism Industry is economically very important for the country. It has grown phenomenally over the years, that it has outperformed even the manufacturing, financial services and retail sectors. Indian Tourism Industry is not just a growth engine but also an employment generator and export growth engine. According to the Economic Survey 2011-12 Tourism can create direct as well as indirect employment, small to large scale employment, absorbing specialized to unskilled workers.

The World Travel and Tourism Council calculated that tourism generated 6.4 trillion (US$94 billion) or 6.6% of the nation’s GDP in 2012. It supported 39.5 million jobs, 7.7% of its total employment. India ranked 38th in the world in terms of foreign tourist arrivals with about 7.68 million foreign tourists visiting India in 2014, indicating an increase of 10.2% foreign tourists and an increase of 14.5% in Foreign exchange earnings (FEE) over the previous year. The provisional number of Domestic tourist was 1281.95 million in 2014 registering an increase by 11.9 % over the previous year (Indian Tourism Statistics, 2014). The Indian


Tourism Industry has grown at about 7.35% in 2014 and is predicted to grow at an average annual rate of 7.9% till 2023 making India the third fastest growing tourism destination over the next decade.

India ranks among top 3 medical tourism destinations in Asia (Times of India, 2014). After Thailand, India has the second largest number of accredited facilities. The Confederation of Indian Industry (CII) and Grant Thornton Report, 2014, indicates that India’s medical tourism market will more than double in size from $3 billion at present to around $8 billion by 2020 (DNA, 2015).

Besides medical tourism, various other types of tourism in India have registered significant growth and they include rural tourism, adventure tourism, cultural tourism, eco and sustainable tourism, pilgrimage tourism, wellness tourism and wildlife tourism.

FRAMEWORK OF RURAL TOURISM

Rural tourism has become popular in many parts of the world with the growing need for super segmentation of the tourism market (Negi, 1990; Zurick 1992). This form of tourism is a comparatively new entrant in the Indian tourism Industry. It was the ‘National Tourism Development Policy’ 2002 that for the first time gave impetus to rural tourism industry. According to Nagaraju and Chandrashekara (2014) any form of tourism that showcases the rural life, art, culture and heritage at rural locations, thereby benefiting the local community economically and socially as well as enabling interaction between the tourists and the locals for a more enriching tourism experience can be termed as ‘rural tourism’.

Rural Tourism is essentially a tourism activity that takes place in the rural areas, villages or the countryside. ‘Rural tourism’, ‘agri-tourism’, ‘green tourism’, ‘sustainable and ecotourism’ are all interrelated terms. In fact rural tourism may entail farm/agricultural tourism, heritage and culture tourism, scenic/nature tourism, adventure tourism, pilgrim tourism and eco-tourism. Rural tourism is a concept that has slowly gained popularity amongst travellers.

Compared to the conventional tourism, rural tourism has certain typical characteristics. Rural Tourism is a multi-faceted, experience-oriented activity. The locations for rural tourism are less populated taking place in predominantly natural environments. It is based on the premise of preserving culture, heritage and traditions. It has a lot to provide in a single package; the setting is nonurban with rural essence for the tourists. This benefits the local community while preserving rural assets, values and heritage. Rural Tourism is just not farm based tourism. It includes farm based holidays but also includes special interest nature holidays and ecotourism, fishing, educational travel, arts and heritage

tourism, and in some areas entails ethnic tourism. The tourists participate in creation of sales, profits, jobs, returns and income. Rural Tourism is characterized by the fact that consumption takes place where the service is provided (Steenwagen, 2003) and the economic impact of tourism is important factor in the national, regional, and public planning and economic development.

In India, the scheme of rural tourism was launched in 2002-03 by the Ministry of Tourism but till date it has yet to define ‘rural tourism’ formally. Initially it promoted ‘heritage tourism/ ‘religious tourism’, ‘ecotourism’, etc., which included rural tourism. Its main objective was to highlight rural life, art, culture and heritage at rural locations and in villages which have core competence in art, craft, handloom, textiles and have resplendent natural settings and environment (Case Box-1). The premise behind promoting rural tourism was to benefit the local community economically and socially and to enable interaction between tourists and local population for a mutually inspiring and enriching exchanges and experience (Case Box-2). The promotion of village tourism was also aimed towards generating revenue for rural communities through tourist visits, which may stop the rampant unchecked migration from rural to urban areas in search of employment and better opportunities for life.

Case Box 1: Interacting with the Warli Painters of Maharashtra

The Purushwadi, Valwanda, Dehna in Maharastra offers 1-5 days of wandering through the forests in Dehna, interacting with the Warli painters-the folk painters of Valwanda and witnessing a night sky lit with millions of fireflies in Purushwadi.

Case Box-2: Uttrakhand Rural Tourism: In the lap of nature

The Kumaon region in Uttarakhand has beautiful hilltops and the village Deora, Pallyu and Shaukiyathal offer unique picturesque sights of typical village mountain dwellings, houses that have intricately designed doors and windows, the mesmerizing waterfalls, the traditional Kumaoni music and dance and the lush green terraced fields.

India has grown remarkably and the urban areas and spaces at some cities match their counterparts at the international level. Some of these look even alien in their architecture, structural design and ambience. Some of the five star hotels, hospitals, malls and the banks are in utter contrast to what the traditional Indian architecture, buildings, monuments, market places and areas of tourist interest might offer. For those who are already stressed by the urban living and life


style and yearn to be back in the ‘lap of nature’, rural tourism provides them with the apt opportunity to do so (Case Box-3).

Rural tourism acts as an elixir to counter stress and “urbanization” syndrome. Many are interested in the taste of real India- India in its basic elemental form. For those yearning for this, it can only be explored in the many villages which encompass the rich cultural heritage, traditions customs and lifestyle. Rural destinations offer firsthand experience to the rural life in simple, unpolluted environment steeped in rural culture that entails staying in mud houses, enjoying the simple yet delicious meals, revelling in the folk art, music and dances for entertainment. Hence for those interested in travelling to the roots and discovering the soul of India,‘rural tourism’ is what that they should undertake.

Case Box 3:

Rural Tourism of Spiti Valley

The Komic village in the Spiti Valley is the highest inhabited Asian Village at 4,400 metres. Komic along with Demul and Langza village provides homestays and offers opportunities to interact with Buddhist Theatre artists, try hands at high altitude farming, learn to cook customary food items, mountain biking, yak safaris, do botanical tours, experience the local craft and even venture into the habitat of blue sheep, the snow leopards and the oldest 8,00,000 years old species of Himalayan wolves!

RURAL - URBAN DIVIDE IN INDIA

Rural areas or ‘countryside’ in India are referred to as ‘village’. The Villagers comprise the core of Indian society and also represent the real India. Mahatama Gandhi, in his famous speech during the Lahore session of the Congress in 1929, said, “India lives in her villages.” And indeed according to the Census of India (2011) nearly 70 per cent of the country’s population lives in 638,596 villages of rural India (Census of India, 2001). The rural-urban population distribution is 68.84 per cent (83.3 crore residing in rural areas) and 31.16 per cent (37.7 crore residing in urban areas) respectively (Census of India 2011).

The chief source of livelihood in rural areas is agriculture and allied activities as fishery, horticulture, animal husbandry, dairying, sericulture, cottage industries, pottery etc. The agriculture sector employs 49% labour force and contributes a big chunk of 17% to India’s GDP. According to the World Bank’s growth outlook for 2015-16 the Indian economy has grown at 7.6% and is expected to grow 7.7-8.0% in 2016-17. In terms of its nominal GDP India is now the seventh largest in the world and the third largest by purchasing power parity (PPP) (World Economic Outlook Database,

2014). The International Monetary Fund (2015) calls India “the bright spot in the global landscape”.

Inspite of this silver lining, the contribution of the agricultural sector to the GDP of India has declined connoting a distressed agriculture sector, distressed farmers and an extremely distressed rural life. The estimates of the Rangarajan Committee indicate that rural poverty is higher than urban and stands at approximately 31% in 2011-12 (Planning Commission, 2014).The vital development indicators clearly point that the rural India is a laggard!

Even the latest available Human Development Report (HDR) 2015 shows that in the overall global ranking India was placed at 130 (out of 188 countries) with 0.609 score in the medium human development category. The human development index [HDI] is estimated in terms of three basic capabilities: to live a long and healthy life, to be educated and knowledgeable, and to enjoy a decent economic standard of living. The 2011 Census of India points to a literacy gap wherein the literacy rate among urban population is 84.1 per cent while it is 67.8 per cent for the rural population; the overall life expectancy in India is 63.5 years and interestingly, an urban female lived 4.9 years longer than a rural female and 7.9 years longer than a rural male (Registrar General of India, 2011). The Crude Birth Rate is higher (24.1) in rural areas as compared to (18.3) urban areas. The Infant Mortality Rate (2012) is very high in rural areas (46 per 1000 live births) as compared to urban areas (28 per 1000 live births).

The total unemployment rates in the country stands at 4.9 per cent and the youth unemployment rate at 12.9 per cent (Ministry of Labour and Unemployment, 2014). The unemployment rate in rural India is at 1.7 percent and in urban areas at 3.4 percent, according to the 66th survey results of 2011-12 carried out by National Sample Survey Organisation. Kerala in spite of the highest literacy rates has the highest unemployment rates which is 73/1000 in Urban areas (National average is 34/1000 in Urban areas) and 76/1000 in the rural areas (National average is 16/1000 in rural areas), while Rajasthan and Gujarat have the least unemployment rate among major States of India. Forty nine per cent of India’s workforce is employed in farming in rural areas.

Since the rural families tend to be larger on an average, this would mean anything from 55-60 per cent of our population is farm-dependent. In other words more half of the workforce produces just a seventh of the GDP and nearly two-third of India subsists on it (Gupta, 2015). Also inspite of striking fall in Inflation in India, these gains are not equally distributed…the rural inflation continues to be higher than the urban inflation as per the analysts at CEIC, HSBC Global Research (2016). Inspite of 70 years of India’s independence, the rural India and its people are in throes of


abject poverty, illiteracy, ill health, apathy, neglect, lacking even the bare essentials that are necessary for a dignified life. The villages fall abysmally low in almost every aspect of socio-economic parameter and its analysis. All this together projects a picture of grave rural distress and rural decay.

RURAL TOURISM COMBATING THE RURAL - URBAN DIVIDE

In this grave situation of extreme Rural-Urban divide and the prevailing rural poverty in India, Rural Tourism can provide a great balm and relief to the rural poor. Many underdeveloped / remote areas across the world are using Tourism as an instrument of growth of neglected, remote and rural/ backward areas. In India too it is illustrated by many successful experiences and examples of rural tourism one particularly being that of remote Tipam Phakey Village of Assam which is illustrated in the Case Box 4.

Case Box 4: Rural Tourism of Tipam Phakey Village, Assam

Milli’s (2012) Study of Rural Tourism in the Tipam Phakey Village of Naharkatia in Dibrugarh District in Assam indicates that this place has great diversity of culture, traditions and natural resources, which makes this place very attractive tourist destination. This village provides opportunities to tourists where they can experience the rural life style of the local people, even witness their traditions, customs, their ethnic attire and share their local foods and cuisines in delightful destination. The economy of the village is reliant only on tea estate since the illegal wood business has been stopped! Tourism and tourist activities help the villagers accrue economic and other benefits from it. The employment opportunities and income levels of the youths have increased. About 17 youth of which 2 are girls are engaged in organisation of eco-tourism camps. The Handloom industry and production of local handloom products has got a positive impetus. The rural people now consciously work towards preservation of natural resources and rural eco system. They are involved in creation of social forests and preservation of existing forests since they form the very basis of rural livelihood and income generation. The villagers now realise the importance of their almost hidden but old culture the ‘Tai culture’ which they now consciously preserve and proudly showcase to the world.

In context of the rural urban divide, ‘Rural Tourism’ becomes a significant economic activity and service for the rural people as they act both as a ‘service producer’ and also as a ‘service provider’. The tourists come to rural areas for gaining first hand taste and experience of rural life. In return the villagers get money from the tourists and this not only generates extra or alternative sources of income for them but

also opens many doors for various entrepreneurial activities and self-employment opportunities. The basic concept of rural tourism is to benefit the local rural communities through rural enterprises, income generation, employment opportunities, conservation and also providing impetus to the development of rural arts and crafts, investment for infrastructure development simultaneously preserving environment and heritage. In light of the fact that as the share of contribution of the agriculture sector is on the decline to the GDP of our country a strong, alternative and a viable sector is required by the rural India to diversify their local economies. India with all its diversities, where about 70 per cent of the country’s population lives in about 6.5 million villages and where the Indian Tourism Industry has grown at about 7.35%, ‘rural tourism’ sure can be an important and a viable alternative sector that can contribute to the rural economy and act as a tool for rural development. Rural tourism can not only be a harbinger of socio-economic development of the rural people but can also facilitate in increasing the foreign exchange reserve of the country.

RURAL TOURISM AND RURAL STAYS

Rural Tourism initiatives have been underway even long before the advent of the official concept in our country. Initially it was promoted and mentored by private owners and tour operators. As early as 1980, Rajasthan had heavy inbound traffic which was being run individually and privately. Randhir Singh of Mandawa started home-stay in Castle Mandawa in 1980, even when vegetables were not available in that region. This gave a cue to villagers to grow vegetables and fruits which could now be supplied at a higher rate within their own vicinity without fear of spoilage and produce going waste. Gradually many royalties who were finding it difficult to maintain their Estates, followed suite and started opening their palaces or lodges into high-end hotels and resorts. Foreign tourists thronged for a first hand slice from ‘royalty life’ and Maharaja (royalty) treatment. Rural tourism started at this time where besides the luxurious stay at Samode Palace, village huts with attached bath came up. These huts kept the vernacular architecture of the village intact to be part of the local landscape. Yet they offered comfortable stay to the tourists at affordable prices. The accompanying rural experiences in village huts, interaction with villagers and rural craftsmen & gorging local cuisine made it a unique experience of a life time!

RURAL TOURISM AND SUSTAINABLE RURAL LIVELIHOODS

In 2003 Endogenous Tourism Project-Rural Tourism Scheme (ETP-RTS) was started by Ministry of Tourism in collaboration with United Nations Development Project


(UNDP). The objective of the Project was focussing on sustainable rural livelihoods, income generation, employment, gender equality, empowerment of women, youth and marginalized sections of the rural society and their capacity building. The Project was initiated at Sualkuchi in 2004, the largest village in the Brahmaputra basin in the Kamrup District of Assam. Sualkuchiis famous for silk weaving and recognised as the “Manchester of the East”. The project experimented with tourism as an engine of sustainable rural development under Indian conditions (Ministry of Tourism UNDP, 2008). Tourist sites entirely managed by local communities were used for the first time under the ETP. Empowerment of women, promotion of self-help groups (SHGs), health camps, sanitation drives, and vocational trainings were the peripheral activities under the project. In 2008 the total income of these sites was slightly over INR 48.7 million with 40% increase in income level of at least 80 families. Today, the local cultural groups are performing at national platforms, the cuisine of Sualkuchi is recognized as one of the best among all the ETP sites in the country, and the villagers are now confident enough to receive tourists from all over the globe. Out of the total of thirty six ETP sites, fifteen sites are now open for visitors, and approximately 14,000 individuals are involved in these sites. This has been branded under ‘explorerural India’ sites for a successful rural tourism promotion strategy.

It was in 2007-08 that rural tourism artisans were brought to the National platform through the Delhi Haat, International Trade Fair, Delhi and Toshali National Craft Mela, Bhuvaneshwar. The Rural Tourism site Aranmula in Kerala possesses all the attributes of rural Kerala. It is a unique example of sustainable rural livelihood and integrated rural development. The local artisans of Aranmula engage in traditional yet internationally acclaimed crafts such as the Aranmula metal mirror the ‘Aranmula Kannadi’, the mural paintings, the construction of boats which are used in the annual Palliyodam boat race or the Snake boat race festival taken on the river Pampa.

Box 5: Help Tourism of the East and North East India:

The ‘Help Tourism’ organization launched a village-based tourism initiative in 1991 in West Sikkim by involving all the 40 families of the village. They offered rural home-stays that were clean, comfortable and cost effective to special-interest travellers like trekkers or climbers. Today, the same project has been replicated in 22 places across East and Northeast India providing enriched rural tourism experiences with unique local flavour!

Hodka Village in the Rann of Kutch is inhabited by the cattle herders of the Haleopotra clan who came in search of pastures from the Sindh (now Pakistan). Overtime the Meghwals the leather craft and embroidery craftsmen from the North also settled here. The Village Tourism Committee of Hodka has

developed the Shaan-e-Sarhad (Sunset at the Border) Village Resort that offers a unique tourism experience because of its magnificent, spectacular natural surroundings. The hospitable villagers warmly extend their hospitality, laced with traditional Gujarati and Kutchi cuisines aplenty with buttermilk (chaach), along with first hand peep into their local traditions, culture and their stupendously creative art and craft. Hodka is a shoppers delight, because of the rich crafts available here. Accommodation is available in both Bhungas -the memorable mud huts and also the tents.Shaan-e-Sarhadis a unique example of combining traditional livelihoods (embroidery, weaving, block printing, bandhani) with innovation (rural tourism) and contributing significantly to the economy of Kutch.

Rural Tourism although a road less travelled, actually gives a deep insight to local culture, and is a spiritual journey for many. The aroma of the local freshly brewed tea, the narrow unwinding roads, taste of a variety of cuisines and savouries is what a tourist can all experience while opting for rural tourism. Realizing the potential of rural tourism, 169 rural tourism sites have been sanctioned by the Ministry of Tourism in 2011 in 28 states/UTs of our country. These rural tourism sites have brought many accolades and laurels at national as well as International level. In recent times many private tour operators have innovated and are conducting tourism for even the wheelchair wanderers, developing tourists’ skills in rural art-folk art, folk music and folk dance, providing them opportunities for ecotourism and to even try out their hands at farming & hence catering to the diverse needs of wander lust tourists across the globe.

Case Box 6: Rural Tourism & Prestigious Awards

The Rural Tourism site Aranmula in Kerala got the prestigious Pacific Asia Travel Association (PATA) Award in 2007 while the Rural Tourism Project at the Hodka Village in Kutch District of Gujarat won the Pacific Asia Travel Association (PATA) award 2010 in the heritage category.

CHALLENGES OF RURAL TOURISM

The greatest challenge faced by rural tourism is educating the rural people and bringing favourable attitudinal changes towards the tourists coming to their villages and also towards the very concept of rural tourism as an economic enterprise for the economic development of the village folk. ‘Commoditisation of culture’ or ‘commoditization of culture’ is another grave threat and challenge in the development of rural tourism. Shepherd (2002) is of the view that commoditisation occurs since the ‘tourists want to experience cultures different from their own’. Commoditisation destroys the local culture and its authenticity. This can lead to so called ‘endangered cultures’(Taylor, 2001). On the other hand Cole


(2007)believes that it can actually help and empower the locals e.g. Aranmula in Kerala (Case Box-6) and the Hodka Village in Kutch. The debate on commoditisation purports both positive viewpoint i.e. development of the rural indigenous people and negative viewpoint that it can lead to their culture being frozen to a certain point in development to provide a so called original, pure, pristine and authentic experience to the tourists. What is required is a balance so that both the rural people and the tourists can mutually benefit from the situation.

For obtaining visible positive impacts in the lives of the rural people it is important that they have equal stake in the planning, development, implementation and management of the rural tourism. Because they can on their own monitor, control and counter the negative impacts of tourism. Establishment of democratic processes also helps people at all levels to participate positively in the development of rural tourism and in the preservation of the environment also. Rural tourism also entails development of the basic rural infrastructure. The landscape and public amenities have to be so developed that quality of life of villagers can be improved and healthy, hygienic environment can be created and made available to the tourists. Local cooperation and participation of rural people is also required in the occupational training and handicraft promotion. Hence participation of the stake holder is an effective approach in bringing positive impacts in rural areas and overcoming all challenges.

SUGGESTED STRATEGIES FOR PROMOTING RURAL TOURISM

∑ Create an interest among the rural people towards rural tourism, where in they understand its worth in income generation besides agriculture activities.

∑ Although Rural tourism activity has to be either centrally or state funded, but these initiatives have to be designed, planned, implemented and managed by the rural people themselves i.e. it has to be “community based” and “community controlled” initiative.

∑ Department of Commerce, Department of Economics, Department of Extension or Departments of Hotel, Hospitality, Tourism and Management of the state and Central Universities can provide consultancy in the designing, business planning, implementation, management and promotion of Rural tourism.

∑ Rural tourism should be local community centric rather than infrastructure centric. It should emphasise on the ‘process’ rather than the product.

∑ Village Tourism Committee under the leadership of Village Sarpanch or Headman comprising of representatives of all sections of the village should be constituted comprising of women, youth, folk artists,

crafts men, artisans and the marginalized sections of the community.

∑ The Village Tourism Committee should have sub-committees, each sub-committee assigned with specific portfolio aimed at promoting

∑ Local food and hospitality ∑ Culture: customs, rituals, traditions, performing and

folk art ∑ Architecture ∑ Traditional/indigenous goods and materials ∑ Capacity building trainings should be imparted to the

villagers in areas of – leadership, rudimentary language learning and

communication skills. – management of tourism. – waste management. – accounting. – development of indigenous publicity materials.

∑ Creation of a village museum that showcases the rural life through photographs, exhibits, artefacts, specimens, models all prepared indigenously.

∑ Developing website for promotion of rural tourism and creation of digitized Village in the era of ‘Digital India’.

∑ Synergy between various Government Departments, Government Health services, Private Health providers and Hospitals, local Civic authorities and District Administration is a must for development of concrete motor able roads as far as possible, provision of safe drinking water, adequate health facilities and total sanitation scheme.

∑ The natural, cultural, human and capital resources indigenous to the area ought to be used.

∑ The infrastructure that is created should have a vernacular architecture and use locally available materials so that it is in synch with the local ambience and experience.

∑ The village mason, craftsmen, carpenter etc should be roped in for creation of infrastructure so that it provides them with opportunities for employment and income generation.

∑ Rural Tourism experiences are unique and hence they have to be customized in every place and location.

∑ Authenticity, distinctiveness, holistic and contextual should be the hallmark of the rural tourism experience.

∑ The performing and folk art and crafts should be original and pure and not standardized, stereotypical, cheap imitations.


∑ The intake of Tourists in a season or round the year should be decided by the Village Tourism Committee so that visits in large numbers does not wreak havoc with the very ecosystem and diversity which the tourists have come to enjoy.

∑ Whether ‘Home stays’ or centralized accommodation will be provided to rural tourist, has to be decided by the villagers as:

– are the houses ready to put up tourists. – is there a possibility of child sexual abuse as

reported in Goa, Kerala, Orissa in home stay. – impact of tourists on hosts and hosts culture all

needs to be kept in focus. ∑ Quality services and facilities should be provided. ∑ Pricing should be such that tourists perceive it to be

‘value for money’. ∑ Being an important revenue generation activity for

the rural people, rural tourism should include several mechanisms whereby revenue can be generated actually. This may be done through

– Entrance fee to important locations, forested areas, museums, ecowalks, scenic beauty sights, cultural arenas

– Fee for Facility use – Permit Fee or License Fee – On-site sales – Royalties – Collection from Tour Operators

∑ The villagers should explore and provide opportunities to the tourists for nature walks, trekking, climbing-mountains/ trees, exploring biodiversity in natural parks.

∑ Rural tourism sites even though may be remotely located but they have to be well connected by road, rail and air.

∑ Conscious attempts should be made to preserve and maintain the traditional culture and value system along with refinements on these via the assimilation process due to tourist linkages.

∑ Success stories and Case studies have to be very meticulously documented.

∑ Systematic researches may be taken up systematically by the Ministry of Tourism, Government of India. which keep tab of

∑ The data and inputs from the experiments and innovations in the rural tourism the achievements, success and even failures can form basis for improvements in this sector.

∑ Both local as well as world media should be used to extensively highlight the potentials of rural tourism.

∑ Well conceived and construed Media strategies, use of innovative advertisements, spots, circulation of print and other materials would not only promote rural tourism but make masses aware about rural tourism, its issues and also its concerns.

∑ A sound development driven Government Policy Framework is essential to make rural tourism an important viable economic activity.

FUTURE PROSPECTS

Currently the prospects are very bright for the Indian Tourism Industry. The Foreign Tourists coming to India are on a steady incline. Expected to grow at an average annual rate of 7.9% till 2023, tourism offers an immense scope for India’s economic development and its people. The Impact & Evaluation Study of Rural Tourism Projects undertaken by the Ministry of Tourism, Government of India was done by AC Nielsen ORG-MARG clearly shows that of the 107 Rural Tourism Projects evaluated in 26 States, 41 were highly successful projects while 33 were averagely successful. Only 33 projects were unsuccessful. The Report indicates a bright prospect for the rural tourism industry. Rural tourism has great economic, environmental and socio-cultural prospects.

It acts as a tool for economic development to promote both capital inflow and employment opportunities to the impoverished rural communities. It can help in adding to rural amenities and infrastructure. Besides the economic value, rural tourism becomes an incentive for conservation of environment and ecosystems. Since the environment becomes a showcase to the tourist, hence there is a greater desire for both the host and the tourist to maintain it. At a socio-cultural level, tourists become sensitive to the existing disparities and difficulties of the rural peoples life. They even start contributing back to the community, their local arts, handicrafts and performing arts and bringing back resources to this community and helping in promoting education, conservation, disease prevention, and other needs. Success stories, Case studies and other researches may be taken up systematically by the Ministry of Tourism, Government of India to regularly keep tab of the achievements, success and even failures to help improve the rural tourism sector. Systematic use of Medias through innovative ads, spots, circulation of print and other materials for promotion of rural tourism is an important area. This has to be strengthened systematically to make the masses aware about rural tourism, its issues and also its concerns.

India a land of diversities has a lot to offer to the tourists coming here. The Rural tourism in India is still in its nascent state but once tapped to its full potential, it can open great


vistas of mutual benefit for both the tourists as well as the rural people alike. Every region, state and village of our country has its own language, culture, tradition, customs, costumes, cuisines which can offer unique non-urban, ‘country experiences’ of a life time. Rural tourism can offer memorable experiences in their basic elemental state. In fact it is a journey back to our roots encompassing a wide range of activities and attractions all set in their natural rural environment. It is also a very important activity from the point of rural development because of its contribution to the economic and social development of the rural people.

Experiences from around the globe suggest that, Rural Tourism is the main driver of economic growth and employment in more than 80 countries. Similarly, rural India besides contributing in the agriculture sector, has immense potentials of growth in various sectors of tourism viz. rural tourism, cultural tourism, agro- tourism, eco-tourism, sustainable tourism, religious tourism etc. The richness of the rural India- the people, their lifestyle, traditions, locations, arts, crafts, handicrafts can be used to the very advantage of the rural people. The Ministry of Tourism is also committed to develop rural tourism in rural areas in a “sustainable manner” while simultaneously promoting and popularizing it through active multimedia campaign.

REFERENCES

Annual Report (2002-2003). Department of Tourism, Government of India.




Census of India (2001), Government of India.Census of India (2011), Government of India. Clémentin-Ojha, C. (2014). India, that is Bharat. One

Country, Two Names. South Asia Multidisciplinary Academic Journal, 10.

Cole, S. (2007). Beyond authenticity and commodifica-tion. Annals of Tourism Research. 34(4), 943-960.

Fazili, A. I., & Ashraf, S. H. (2006). Tourism in India: Planning and Development. New Delhi. Sarup and Sons.

Five Year Plans. Government of India.Gupta, S. (2015). Why rural India matters: Agriculture’s

share in economic GDP may be low but in electoral, po-litical equivalent of GDP, it is about 60 per cent’. India Today, June 5, 2015.

Houlot, A. (1961). Le Turismeet La Biblie. Revue l´Académie Internationale du Turisme. Monaco.

Mehra, P. (2015). Gap widening between rural and urban India. The Hindu. October 21, 2015.

Mili, N. (2012). Rural tourism development: An overview of tourism in the TipamPhakey village of Naharkatia in dibrugarh district, Assam (India). International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 2(12), 1-3.

Ministry of Tourism (2014). Indian tourism statistics. Government of India.

Ministry of Tourism, Government of India /UNDP India (2008). Redefining Tourism - Experiences and Insights from Rural Tourism Projects in India.

Nagaraju, L. G., & Chandrashekara, B. (2014). Rural tourism and rural development in India. International Journal of Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies (IJIMS), 1(6), 42-48.

Negi, J. M. (1990). Tourism development and nature conser-vation. New Delhi. Metropolitan Publishers.

Planning Commission. (2014). Report of the Expert group to review the methodology for measurement of poverty. Government of India.

Report of World Travel and Tourism Council on Economic Impact of Tourism in India 2011-12.

Shepherd, R. (2002). Commodification, culture and tour-ism. Tourist studies, 2(2), 183-201.

Steenwagen, L. (2003). Marketing Solution in rural tourism in Lithuania (Working Paper). Academic Press.

Taylor, J. P. (2001). Authenticity and sincerity in tour-ism. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(1), 7-26.

Zurick, D. N. (1992). Adventure travel and sustainable tour-ism in peripheral economy of Nepal. Annals of Association of American Geographers, 82(4), 606-628.

Net resources:Aranmula. Retrieved from http://incredibleindia.org/eri/

Aranmula.php?site=Aranmula&page=art%20and%20craft

CEIC. (2016). Exploring India’s Core Inflation. Retrieved from https://www.ceicdata.com/en/blog/ceic-newslert-exploring-indias-core-inflation

Crude Birth Rate. (2012) Retrieved from http://www.medin-dia.net/health_statistics/general/cruderate.asp

DNA (2015). Indian medical tourism to touch Rs 52,200 crore by 2020: Grant Thornton Sun, 1 Nov 2015-12:14pm, PTIRetrieved March 09, 2016 from website: http://www.dnaindia.com/money/report-indian-medical-tourism-to-touch-rs-52200-crore-by-2020-grant-thornton-2140885

HDI (2015). India ranks 130th in 2015 Human Development Index: UNDP’. December 15, 2015. Retrieved from http://currentaffairs.gktoday.in/india-ranks-130th-2015-human-development-index-undp-12201528950.html


Infant Mortality Rate. (2102). Retrieved from https://com-munity.data.gov.in/infant-mortality-rate-imr-by-place-of-residence-in-india-during-1990-2012/

Hodka. Retrieved from incredibleindia.org/eri/Hodka.php-Ministry of Labour and Unemployment (2014).India unemployment rate.Retrieved 19 March 2016 from website:http://ieconomics.com/india-unemployment-rate

Ministry of Tourism. (2009). Evaluation cum impact study of rural tourism projects. Retrieved from website: http://tourism.gov.in/sites/default/files/Other/merged1_.pdf

‘National Tourism Development Policy. (2002). Retrieved from website: http://el.doccentre.info/eldoc/g21_/Nationaltourism.htm

Report of Working Group on Tourism in India, 12th Five Year Plan (2012-2017), Ministry of Tourism, Government of India. Retrieved June 03, 2016 from website: http://plan-ningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp12/wgrep_tourism.pdf

Roy, V. (2008). Rural Tourism in India. Retrieved from http://www.outlooktraveller.com/miscellaneous/rural-tourism-in-india-1005959

Sualkuchi. Retrieved from http://incredibleindia.org/eri/Sualkuchi.php The World Bank (2016).

Times of India. (2014). India ranks among top 3 medical tour-ism destinations in Asia, PTI Sep 1, 2014, 08.59 PM IST. Retrieved from http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/busi-ness/india-business/India-ranks-among-top-3-medical-tourism-destinations-in-Asia/articleshow/41447360.cms

Travel & Tourism. (2013). World Travel and Tourism Council. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20140221165551/http://wttc.org/site_media/up-loads/downloads/india2013_1.pdf

UNWTO (2016). UNWTO Definition of Tourism (2016). Retrieved from http://www.tugberkugurlu.com/archive/definintion-of-tourism-unwto-definition-of-tourism-what-is-tourism

POTENTIAL OF RURAL TOURISM IN INDIA - A SYNOPTIC VIEW

Ridhi Sharma*

Abstract Potential of Rural Tourism in India - A Synoptic View

India is a multi-destination country with a variety of tourist attractions and facilities. Traditionally known largely for its historical and cultural dimensions, tourism today is highlighted for its immense business opportunities. The recognition of rural tourism as an alternative to mainstream is a recent concept. The basic concept of rural tourism was envisaged with benefit accruing to local community through entrepreneurial opportunities, income generation, employment opportunities, investment for infrastructure development and preservation of the environment and heritage. In India, rural tourism in its true form is relatively new. The potential for rural tourism to be a major force in rural economic development is yet to be realized to the fullest extent. Therefore, with a view to underscore a clear potential of rural tourism in India, the present study has made an attempt to highlight the industrial potential for rural tourism and articulates a spectrum for conceptualizing rural tourism in India. The study mainly focuses on challenges and opportunities to rural tourism in India and future prospects for its sustainable development.

Keywords: Rural Tourism, Indian Economy

INTRODUCTION

Tourism is currently the fastest growing sector of the Indian economy. It is a major contributor to foreign exchange earnings, provides employment to millions, acts as a vehicle for infrastructure development and is one of the largest and fastest growing industries in the world. Tourism, thus, can go a long way in changing the fortunes of the country which is always reeling under the problem of unemployment and fiscal deficit. Foreign tourism along with domestic tourism may contribute to India in its mission of becoming a developed country by 2020 (Bhardwaj and Singh, 2010).

Recognizing the importance of the tourism industry in India, the Government of India has taken many policy measures such as Tourism Policy 1982, Tourism Plan of Action 1992 and Tourism Policy 1997. Through these policies, the government called for effective coordination of public and private participation to achieve synergy in the development of tourism. Various plans were identified for taking advantage of the emerging markets. Business tourism, health tourism, pilgrim tourism, adventure tourism, and rural tourism are some of the new products devised for changing demand.

Rural tourism has been identified as one of the priority areas for development of Indian tourism. The ninth (Five - year plan) has identified the basic objectives of rural tourism, that is to (a) improve the quality of life of rural people, (b)

to provide good experience to the tourist and (c) to maintain the quality of environment. In 2004 The Union Ministry of Tourism in collaboration with United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) launched an endogenous tourism project to promote rural tourism in India. According to the project plan UNDP will help areas of capacity building, involvement of NGOs, local communities and artisans to build strong community- private and public sector partnership (Financial Express 2004).

Rural tourism refers to any kind of tourism that designs the rural life, art, culture and traditions in rural areas, thereby benefitting the local people economically and socially. The beauty of rural tourism depends upon seasons and local festivals and also on preservation of culture, traditions and heritage etc. As per Gannon (1994), ‘Rural Tourism’ covers “a range of activities provided by farmers and rural people to attract tourists to their area in order to generate extra income for their business.” Any form of tourism that showcases the rural life, art, culture and heritage at rural locations, thereby benefiting the local community economically and socially as well as enabling interaction between the tourists and the locals for a more enriching tourism experience can be termed as rural tourism. Rural tourism is essentially an activity which takes place in the countryside. In fact rural tourism is a multi- faceted activity and may include agri-tourism, sports tourism, cultural tourism, eco-tourism, heritage tourism, pilgrim tourism and adventure tourism. It

* Lecturer, International Centre for Cross Cultural Research & H.R.M, University of Jammu, Jammu&Kashmir, India. Email: [email protected]


Potential of Rural Tourism in India - A Synoptic View 51

is an experience oriented and location specific tourism and solely depends upon natural environment. It begins with community initiative and arrangement, celebrating local culture, entrenched local scenery. Rural tourism will benefit the local community through entrepreneurial opportunities, income generation, employment opportunities, conservation and development of rural arts and crafts, investment for infrastructure development and preservation of the environment and heritage (Mishra, 2001). The rich diversity and variety that India has in terms of different cultures, the different customs and traditions, the colorful festivals, folks, arts and handicrafts as well as the performing arts and historical heritage make many rural areas in India as potential rural tourism sites.

In India, rural tourism in its true form is relatively new. The potential for rural tourism to be a major force in rural economic development is yet to be realized to the fullest extent. The development of a strong platform around the concept of rural tourism is definitely useful for a country like India, where almost 74% of the population resides in its seven million villages. Therefore, with a view to underscore a clear potential of rural tourism in India, the present study has made an attempt to highlight the industrial potential for rural tourism and articulates a spectrum for conceptualizing rural tourism. The main aim of the study is to measure the potential of rural tourism in India. The specific objectives of the study are: 1. To highlight different types of rural tourism in India. 2. To study the impact of rural tourism. 3. To identify the challenges and opportunities for rural

tourism. 4. To identify the essential elements for development of

rural tourism.

RURAL TOURISM IN INDIA

The globally recognized “Incredible India” brand of tourism industry, has also a sub- brand called “Explore Rural India”. In 2002 a national tourism policy was introduced with rural tourism identified as a focus area to generate employment and promote sustainable livelihoods. As a part of the National Tourism Policy 2002, the Ministry of Tourism is developing and promoting rural tourism sites which have core competency in art, craft, culture, heritage, handloom, etc. In association with UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), The Tourism Ministry of India has launched a major rural tourism project, covering the whole country. In this project fifty villages have been chosen where access and basic infrastructure like accommodation, food and guides would be provided to promote rural tourism. The villages were chosen on the basis of craft or traditional skills such as the Patachitra painting and Gotipura dance in Raghurajpura,

Ikat style weaving in Pochampally, metal mirrors and Vaastu Vidya in Aranmula, the Chanderi weave in Pranpur, embroidery in Hodka etc.

In fact in India there are different tourism destinations in different stages of the product life cycle. For example, a region like Goa and a city like Shimla have reached a maturity level. They no more require promotion and have exhausted their carrying capacity (infrastructural, environmental or social impacts). Right now their problem is of retaining their image, checking the decline to sustain. On the contrary the regions like Konkan, Vidarbha and Marathwada in Maharashtra are struggling hard to promote its attractions in rural areas and develop its tourism products (Rajkumar and Shinde 2008). The same is the case with many rural parts of India, even after having enough potential to attract both domestic and foreign tourists, profiling and attracting tourists becomes a major issue. Also there are problems of the local bodies, who are either not aware about the developmental role of tourism or are constrained by their own politics or lack of funds. Most rural tourism businesses of all kinds invest relatively little in marketing and related training (Lane, 1991). But to be sustainable as businesses, and in turn to sustain their communities and cultural landscapes, rural tourism operators have much to gain from improving marketing practice (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1994). While marketing a rural tourism destination (region, village or leisure spots) there is need of strategic approach.

THE IMPACT OF RURAL TOURISM

Rural tourism has many potential benefits like foreign exchange, employment, higher government revenues and the transformation of agriculture into a modern service industry. But at the same time it can also cause harm to many indigenous societies. The impact of rural tourism in India can be studied under following heads:

The Economic Impact

Rural tourism has proved to be an important source of job opportunity particularly for the economically underdeveloped people of rural communities. Local residents with few skills can readily work as food servers, retail clerks, and hospitality workers. Furthermore, rural tourism can also offer business opportunities to local inhabitants. Thus it can play an important role in poverty alleviation. Weaver (1986) notes that rural tourism results in enhanced employment opportunities, increased income potential for local residents, diversification of the local economic base, and additional tax revenues for rural areas. However, it should be kept in mind that although rural tourism is economically beneficial for India, it is a two-edged sword which may damage many


indigenous communities. The rural people have to depend on the urban entrepreneur, so the benefit may not reach them. Most of the facilities such as resorts, hotels and tour companies belong mainly to urban investors who take away most of the profit. On the other hand, jobs in rural areas are frequently low-paying, part-time and seasonal and often offer limited benefits. Moreover, local people sometimes are compelled to sell the local handicraft and farm produce products at lower price due to lack of competition.

The Environmental Impact

Tourism revenues can be used for environmental improvements such as village paving and traffic regulation schemes, sewage and litter disposal. This will result in retaining existing population and businesses and attracting new enterprises and families. Moreover, rural people will learn how to develop healthy environment and to preserve the natural habitats. On the other hand, tourism risks such as degrading natural resources in rural areas can have a profound impact on the environment. Some tourism activities may cause environmental pollution from unhygienic disposal of human waste, discharge of sewerage effluent into water sources, and littering. Moreover, rural tourism will disturb natural ecology and over population will spoil the scenic beauty.

The Socio-Cultural Impact

The income from tourism is much higher than what rural people can earn from agriculture. For that tourism has been accepted willingly in many rural areas in spite of its negative effects. Through rural tourism, education and health of the rural community will improve and rural people will be introduced to the modern culture. They will come out of their traditional values and beliefs. They will develop a cultural understanding through fairs and festivals. Moreover, rural tourism encourages conformity to an idle image of community which can result in growth of personal ties and community solidarity. Most significantly it will reduce migration of rural urban areas.

Gender Sensitization

Integration of gender perspectives in the tourism industry is also one of the most important aspects of rural tourism, as it is the major employer of women and offers various opportunities for independent income generating activities for them. According to a study conducted by Ministry of Tourism (2007) it has been reported that gender sensitization has been successful in most of the rural sites. The women folk in the villages have been given necessary skill building

programme for sustainable livelihood. The rural tourism programme has undoubtedly helped the women artisans and the women community in and around the villages, thereby improving their livelihood. The women folk have been given training on cuisine preparation, hospitality management, institution building and other craft forms, due to which their outlook has changed. Thus, through rural tourism employment opportunities for the rural women in the tourism sector has been explored and provided, resulting in their livelihood promotion.

POTENTIAL OF RURAL TOURISM IN INDIA: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

Despite the fact that India is an ideal home for rural tourism, there are many challenges that have been inhibiting its growth. The growth in rural tourism has been plagued by various issues such as information asymmetry, difficult booking and payment processes, non-availability of quality budget accommodations and quality issues. Tourists are forced to visit the few known tourist destinations, resulting in carrying capacity issues and un- reasonably high tariffs at these destinations, while many others lay vacant. Therefore to promote and facilitate rural tourism in India following challenges are to be addressed and considered by the government and other concerned authorities:

Under -Developed Infrastructure

Mere natural beauty along with few other attractions has never been enough to attract large number of tourists anywhere (Rousseau, 2001). India is a country of village landscape, wildlife, community life, and natural heritage that may catch the attention of foreigners. But the country suffers from underdeveloped infrastructure and lack of enough facilities that are the prerequisites for the development of rural tourism in India. Most of the villages in the country lack all-weather roads and electricity. Network of good roads connecting important tourist attractions, creation of wayside amenities and facilities along major tourist roads, strengthening of airports and air connectivity and setting up of budget hotels are some of the areas warranting immediate attention.

Lack of Skilled Manpower

The human element, more than the excellence of the attraction, plays a decisive role in promoting the popularity of tourism sector. There is an acute shortage of skilled and professional manpower in tourism industry in India which, no doubt, impedes its progress here. It has also been observed


that, the trained people in hospitality management are often less interested to go to rural area to work. Hence, the rural people are required to be trained for discharging their duties. They should have enough knowledge about the village landscape and should be able to generate interest in the mind of tourist to visit the site. It should be remembered that the success of rural tourism largely depends on the quality of service provided to the tourist. So, to develop the manpower, the Government and the Tourism Industry needs to make the best use of local youths by training them to explore the huge untapped opportunities.

Lack of Safety and Security

Safety and security of the tourists are major concerns to develop any kind of tourism in any country. Foreign tourists consider our country as a nation with deteriorating social and political turmoil, government instability and insecurity of life, safety and security of tourist especially women tourists. Moreover, when tourists come to India to enjoy its natural beauty, they are afraid of cheating and harassment at the airport, hijacking on the spots, and the disturbance of the beggars. All these events impede tourists’ interest and enthusiasm to explore the rural area of India.

Lack of Communication Skills

Due to lack of proper education, most of the people living in the rural areas lack proper communication skills. They are not in a position to communicate with the foreign tourists. This works as an impediment in promoting tourism in the rural areas.

Lack of Local Involvement/Participation

Local participation is inevitable to flourish rural tourism in India. But in practice most of the rural people do not have much understanding of tourism. They are seldom involved in decision making, planning and implementing policies. Moreover, they are misguided by outside investors who hope to take most of the economic benefits from rural areas. Therefore, local people become confused about what kind of tourism they want to establish in their own area.

National Disasters and Terrorism

Major natural or man-made disasters are termed as national disasters when they extensively cover a number of regions or states of the country. At one stroke they snatch the livelihood of people depending on tourism. The recent destruction brought about by floods in Uttrakhand region and tsunami seismic sea waves over large areas of our coastal regions has been a national disaster. Whenever the very existence of sea beaches has been washed away, beach

tourism is lost completely. Also the continuing terrorist’s activities of militants in many other parts of India are also man-made national disasters. Kashmir is a singular example of such a region. Such disaster can be managed by adopting national level strategies to restore tourist industry and heal the wounds of the local people depending upon it. More than the funds, active participation of the local people is needed.

Taxation

Travel and tourism in India is a high-taxed industry, which makes India expensive as a tourist destination. This is affecting the growth of the industry as India is losing out to other low-cost destinations. Inbound tourism is the one most affected. Various taxes are levied across the entire industry right from tour operators, transporters, airline industry to hotels. These include service tax, luxury tax, tax on transportation, tax on aviation turbine fuel (airline industry), and various taxes on transportation. In addition, these tax rates tend to vary across different states in the country.

Opportunities to Rural Tourism

India is fortunate to have a series of rural tourism products. Also the promotion and aggressive marketing measures undertaken by the government is expected to aid influx of tourists. The industry would also benefit from introduction of new forms of tourism and development of niche segments. Opportunities also exist in ecotourism, adventure tourism, and cruise tourism. With increasing environment awareness and consciousness among tourists and given efforts undertaken by the government and private players, the rural tourism segment is expected to record handsome growth in the coming years.

In fact one of the success stories of rural tourism is the Hodka village in Gujarat. In this village, a village tourism committee owns and operates the Shaam-e-Sarhad (“Sunset at the Border”) Village Resort. The accommodations are simple. Tourists can stay in tents or traditional mud huts, known as “bhungas”. Among the attractions: specially organized workshops in embroidery and leather work; interactions with other artisan communities; wildlife including flamingos, pelicans, foxes and leopards; and nearby archaeological sites of the Indus valley civilization are the prominent tourism activities. In January 2008, there was even a pashu mela - a cattle fair. All this activity were organized, packaged and sold.

Also far away from Hodka, in the northeastern state of Meghalaya, is Mawlynnong. Neither the UNDP nor the government of India has been involved with the ecotourism effort’s success in this village. Rather, a community effort has made it the poster child of rural tourism in India. In 2003, Discover India (a magazine published by Media


Transasia along with the Union Ministry of Tourism) anointed it the cleanest village in Asia. It has retained its charms. “Mawlynnong’s reputation for cleanliness has even earned it a place on the state’s tourism map,” (BBC report). “Hundreds of visitors from all over India now visit the village throughout the year.” Mawlynnong also attracts tourists from around the world.

In addition to this, India also holds immense potential in adventure and cruise tourism. India’s greatest adventure tourism assets are Himalayas and its mighty rivers. Development of adventure tourism can make India a round-the-year tourist destination. Also with respect to festivals in India, desert festival of Jaisalmer concentrating on camel rides and folk dance of the area, cattle fair festival of Pushkar; Dushera of Kulu and kite flying of Gujarat in Ahmedabad are most popular among foreign tourists.

Further to add the State of Haryana has also made a pioneering effort in rural tourism. Its brochure has an opening with the famous quote from poet Rabindranath Tagore on his brush with nature, it asked, “When was the last time you chased chickens, roamed in the fields with pure wind on your face…found yourself jiggling up and down to the thrills of a bullock cart or a tractor ride?” “Rural tourism,” it added, “seeks to awaken the child in you …to experience the unforgettable whiff of the countryside…to plant baby seeds…enjoy the delights of organic food and experience many spontaneous joys of nature that you may never have known before.” Haryana tourism began its foray into rural holidays in association with a dozen or so farms around Delhi. They are located in the Faridabad, Gurgaon, Rohtak and Karnal districts. One example, there is the Surjivan Farm, close to the classic Golf resort, 50 km from Delhi. Spread over fifty acres, it has ethnic huts, a dormitory and even conference facility. There are day packages, overnight stays and group tariffs. Activities include a choice of organic farming, herbal park excursions, orchards and vegetable gardens, a village safari, cattle feeding, cow milking, camel rides and bonfires. Golf and rock climbing can also be arranged. These efforts as we can see are pure tourist ventures and more in keeping with the life style change for the rich and happening people of the urban area with no role to be played by villagers and no effort by the urban to understand and bring about a change in the lives of the rural population.

Also in southern part of India, Buddhist monuments, great mosques, archaeological sites and museums are found. The southern Tirupati zone is the gateway for the largest numbers of Hindu pilgrims worshipping in the temple of Lord Venkateshwar in the Tirumala hills. The northern Vishakapatnam zone is labelled for beach tourism, prehistoric caves, hillocks, most ancient temples and for proximity to tribal life in the beautiful Araku valley. The Eastern Ghats, rivers and the lake reservoirs have been made public for experiencing the thrill of adventure games.

Future Prospects for Rural Tourism

The launch of Incredible India campaign in the last decade resulted in a visible spurt in the flow of foreign tourists into India and earnings there from. A 2011 forecast of the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) predicted that Foreign Tourists Arrivals (FTAs) will cross 11 million by 2021 (approximately one percent of the global tourist population). This is being boosted by the steady rise in visa on arrival tourist (T-VoAs) in the country. During the month of February 2013 the number of visa on arrival (T-VoA) tourists registered a growth of 54.6 percent.

The Tourism Ministry has played an important role in projecting India a hotspot for tourism. Advertising campaigns such as the “Incredible India”, promoted India’s culture and tourist attractions in a fresh and memorable way projecting India as an attractive tourist destination by showcasing different aspects of Indian culture and history like yoga, spirituality, etc. Also in 2009, plans were formulated to extend the Incredible India campaign to the domestic tourism sector as well. As a result of the various lessons from the earlier promotional activities, the new and revamped “Incredible India” campaign has been launched recently which made a paradigm shift in the strategy to promote Indian destinations abroad and within with two separate campaigns. While the international campaign is called “Find what you seek”, the domestic campaign is titled as “Go Beyond”. This is explicitly aimed at doubling the FTA in the next 5 years. According to World Travel and Tourism Council forecasts, India will be a tourism hotspot from 2009 to 2018, having the highest 10-year growth potential.

Also the healthy economic growth recorded in past few years, especially in the services industry, has led to increase in business travel. Higher disposable income and affordability have increased domestic leisure travel in India. Foreign tourist arrivals in India have also grown. The industry’s performance was hit in 2009 due to the global economic slowdown, terror attacks in Mumbai (November 2008) and H1N1 virus. However, the industry has shown signs of recovery in the first half of 2010. This is a clear indicator that the long-term prospects for the Indian travel and tourism industry are bright. India is expected to witness increased tourist activity both in the business and leisure segments in the coming years. International inbound traffic is expected to grow rapidly with increasing investment and trade activity. India has been identified as one of the fastest-growing countries in terms of tourism demand.

CONCLUSION

From the above discussion rural tourism can be defined as the ‘country experience” which encompasses a wide range of attractions and activities that take place in non-urban areas.


The most important purpose of rural tourism is economic and social development of the rural areas. Rural India has much to offer beyond agriculture. It has a great potentiality for different growing segments of tourism like eco-tourism, cultural tourism, religious tourism, adventure tourism etc. However development of rural tourism in India is still at its infant stage. There are various constraints for the growth of rural tourism in India. These includes inadequate quantity and quality of facilities and services, limited availability of tourism related information, restrictive land use policies; failure to adopt and implement sustainable development and management etc. Therefore the central and state governments should recognize importance of rural tourism at priority and help in creating healthy competitive business environment. Efforts should be made to develop the human resources, create adequate facilities and suitable infrastructure like accommodation, roads, airport facilities, rail facilities, local transport, communication links and other essential amenities. There is an urgent need for understanding basics of tourism, development of personality and communication skills particularly in English and Hindi; need for basic computer knowledge; successful imparting of tourism education in the curriculum; more of local community participation and direct involvement.

With a proper marketing plan rural tourism could bring lots of benefit to our society. It could be a sustainable revenue generating project for rural development. It can help inflow to resources from urban to the rural economy. Rural tourism will emerged as an important instrument for sustainable human development including poverty alleviation, employment generation, environmental regeneration and development of remote areas and advancement of women and other disadvantaged groups in the country apart from promoting social integration and international understanding. The government should promote rural tourism to ensure

sustainable economic development and positive social change.

REFERENCES

Bhardwaj, S. S., & Singh, A. (2010). Periscope on the per-formance of Punjab tourism development corporation and Haryana tourism corporation. International Journal of Computing and Business Research, 1(1).

Evaluation study of Rural Tourism Scheme. (2007). Mott Mcdonald, M.R division, Ministry of Tourism, Government of India.

Gannon, A. (1994). Rural tourism as a factor in rural com-munity economic development for economies in transi-tion. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1&2), 51-60.

Lane, B. (1991). Sustainable tourism, a new culture for the Interpreter. Interpretation Journal, 49.

Mishra, R. (2001). Business Line, New Delhi.Rajkumar & Shinde. (2008). Tourism in India - Challenges

Ahead, IIMK.Rousseau, M. R. (2001). Tourism and Bangladesh. Observer

Magazine, pp. 3-4.Weaver, G. (1986). Tourism development: A potential for eco-

nomic growth. New Dimensions in Rural Policy: Building Upon our Heritage. Subcommittee on Agriculture and Transportation of the Joint Economic Committee, U.S. Congress, pp. 440-444.

www.undp.org/.../undp/.../ministry-of-rural-development -and-undp- www.tourism.gov.in. http://indiatouris-monline.blogspot.in/ http://www.discoveralex.com/GeneralDepart_EN/Description.asp http://www.incredi-bleindia.org/index.php/travel/eco-tourism

World Development Indicators. (World Bank). http://data.worldbank.org/

ADVISORY BOARD

Professor Chris CooperDirector, Christel deHaan Tourism and Travel Research lnstituteUnited Kingdom

Professor Brian KingHead of School of Hospitality, Tourism and Marketing, Victoria UniversityAustralia

Professor C. Michael HallUniversity of Canterbury, Christchurch,New Zealand

Professor Nimit Chowdhary Nodal Officer, Indian Institute of Tourism & Travel Management, Noida, India

Dr. T.V. SinghEditor-in-Chief, Tourism Recreation ResearchIndia

Professor Noel B. Salazar Cultural Mobilities Research (CuMoRe), University of Leuven, Belgium

Professor Ghazali Bin Musa Department of Business Strategy and Policy, University of Malaya, Malaysia

Professor Larry Dwyer Honourary Professor, School of Marketing, University of Sydney, Australia

Dr. R.K. BhatnagarAddnl. Director General, Ministry of Tourism, Govt. of India

EDITORIAL BOARD

Editor-in-chiefProf. Sandeep Kulshreshtha

EditorDr. Sutheeshna Babu. S

Deputy EditorsDr. Charu Sheela Yadav

Sanjeev Reddy CKN. Subramaniam

Dr. Jeet DograMr. Shailesh Kumar

l.J. Tourism and Travel (IJT&T) is the bi-annual international journal of lndian lnstitute of Tourism and Travel Management (IITTM). Objective of this journal is to create value for enterprises and organisations in tourism, travel and related sectors and those committed to support them- policy makers, intervention agencies, researchers and academics, by establishing a platform for learning through sharing from experience, dialogue, creativity and imagination. Every issue of the journal many include contributions based on research, policy issues, conceptual models, reviews, case studies, view points, best practices, book reviews, conference reviews, etc. Contributors from all over are invited to share their ideas, knowledge, and experience through this platform. Authors and audiences may contact the editorial team at:

I.J. Tourism and TravelResearch Unit

Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management (IITTM)Govindpuri

Gwalior 474011 MP INDIAFax.: +91-751-2344054

E-mail : [email protected]

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the articles carried in T&T do not reflect the opinion of Indian Institute of Travel and Tourism Management (IITTM) or the editorial team. The information in this journal in believed to be correct, but should not be treated as a substitute for detailed advice in individual situations. It is published without responsibility on part of IITTM and editorial team whether arising out of any negligence, misrepresentation or otherwise for loss occasioned to any person or organisation acting or refraining from acting as a result of any information contained herein. Claims for missing issues can be made within a period of four months of publication. Copyright©2016 Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management International Journal of Tourism and Travel is a bi-annual journal of Indian Institute of Travel and Tourism Management, Gwalior, 474O11, India. Printed and published by Director, Indian Institute of Travel and Tourism Management, Gwalior. Chief-editor: Prof. Sandeep Kulshreshtha, Indian Institute of Travel and Tourism Management, Gwalior 474011.

AdvertisementsInternational Journal of Tourism and Travel Management will accept advertisements. All advertisements are subject to approval by the Editor-in-chief. For details and rates please contact the IITTM office.

SubmissionsInternational Journal of Tourism and Travel Management publishes in the following categories of contributions- policy issues, research articles, concept papers, reviews and cases studies. Shorter contributions of 1500-3000 words are welcome in special categories of viewpoint, best practices, notes, concerns, book reviews and conference reports.

Keeping in mind the audiences, presentation should be lucid and comprehensible. Authors are requested to make it to the point without using an extravagant or ornate language. Even it the manuscript reports the findings of original research, the methodology should be presented clearly and to the extent possible, in a non-technical manner such that our readers with limited back grounds in research methods and analysis are not discouraged from reading the article. Submissions must not be restricted to mere statement of facts. A lot of importance is attached to the analysis of the issue/concept/ findings and their potential for value addition to existing body of knowledge or practice for Tourism, travel and related activities.

Preferred method of submitting manuscripts is through electronic mail to the editor. Submission should be made in Word .doc or .rtf formats. Do not disclose your identity anywhere in the paper except on the cover page.

Always indicate which category of submission you are making. Editor/ referees can suggest a change of category.While submitting electronically always mention in the subject line: Enterprise/ Author name/ first three words in the title.In case manuscript is submitted through surface mail, submit three copies it must accompany paper on CD in the desired format. Ensure that file is free of viruses. It is generally good to create a folder and one copy each inside and outside the folder.

For detailed guidelines on submission or for submission contact:

Editor

International Journal of Tourism and TravelResearch UnitIndian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management (IITTM)Govindpuri, Gwalior 4740l 1 (MP) INDIAE-mail: [email protected]

CopyrightIt is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to this journal have not been published and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. By submitting e manuscript, the authors agree that the copyright for the article is transferred to the publisher, it and when the article is accepted for publication. The copyright covers the exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute the article, including reprints, photographic reproductions, microform, electronic or other reproductions of similar nature and translations. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without permission in writing from the copyright holder.

Intern

ation

al Jou

rnal o

f To

urism

and

Trav

el 2016

ISSN: 0974-2603Vol. 9, No. 1 & 2, 2016


Tourism and Travel

Tourism and Travel

Vo

lum

e 9 Issue 1&

2Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management(An Organization of Ministry of Tourism, Government of India)

Govindpuri, Gwalior - 474 011 (M.P.)

Website: www.iittm.org

In this Issue

ISSN: 0974-2603Vol. 9, No. 1 & 2, 2016


Tourism and Travel

Tourism and Travel

Journal in association with

Ph: 011-28082485, 011-47044510

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.publishingindia.com

Publishing India Group

1. Determinants of Social Media Use Across Tourist Lifecycle Phases - An Empirical Investigation of Tourist Motives Ansted Iype Joseph, S. Victor Anand Kumar

2. Impact of Healthcare Utilities and Law & Order Conditions on Tourism: A Study on Community-based Tourism in North East India Mridul Dutta, Nayan Barua

3. Multi-Stakeholder Perceptions about Sustainable Tourism in Goa: A Structural Equation Modeling Carmelita D' Mello, Santana Fernandes, Friedrich M. Zimmermann, Subhash Kizhakanveatil Bhaskaran Pillai, Jacob Ganef Pah

4. Rural Tourism in India: Relevance, Prospects and Promotional Strategies Shikha Kapur

5. Potential of Rural Tourism in India - A Synoptic View Ridhi Sharma

Vol. 9, No. 1 & 2, 2016 Indian Institute of Tourism and ... · Multi-Stakeholder Perceptions about...

Documents

Transcript of Vol. 9, No. 1 & 2, 2016 Indian Institute of Tourism and ... · Multi-Stakeholder Perceptions about...