DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE RURAL TOURISM AT SUNGAI SEDIM AMENITY FOREST, KEDAH FROM A TOURISM STAKEHOLDERS’ PERSPECTIVE
By ROSLIZAWATI CHE AZIZ
Thesis Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, in Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Tourism)
January 2016
COPYRIGHT
All material contained within the thesis, including without limitation text, logos, icons, photographs and all other artwork, is copyright material of Universiti Putra Malaysia unless otherwise stated. Use may be made of any material contained within the thesis for non-commercial purposes from the copyright holder. Commercial use of material may only be made with the express, prior, written permission of Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Copyright © Universiti Putra Malaysia
ii
Abstract of thesis presented to the Senate of Universiti Putra Malaysia in fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Tourism) DEVELOPMENT OF SUSTAINABLE RURAL TOURISM AT SUNGAI SEDIM AMENITY FOREST, KEDAH FROM A TOURISM STAKEHOLDERS’ PERSPECTIVE
By ROSLIZAWATI CHE AZIZ January 2016
ABSTRACT
Chairperson : Mohani Binti Abdul, PhD Faculty
: Economics and Management
The main focus of the study is to explore the development of sustainable rural tourism at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (SSAF), one of the most popular destinations in Malaysia. The forest is located in the north of Peninsular Malaysia, within Sedim’s area and near Karangan, 30km from Kulim’s town. The World’s Longest Canopy Walk, the 925m long and 50m high Tree Top Walk (TTW), is among the best attractions at SSAF and offers great aerial views of the natural forest. The study is concerned with the past and current situations of tourism development at SSAF from a different perspective of stakeholders; local communities, authorities, operators as well as visitors. The data was collected from 59 participants who directly and indirectly involved with tourism activities at SSAF. The information was derived from two focus group discussions and semi-structured interviewed. Appreciative Inquiry (AI) approach was applied as a new tool or approach for conducting the research while iii
ATLAS.ti software was used as a tool for data interpretation and analysis. The findings show that there are four strengths of SSAF that need to be highlighted, which are nature resources, eco-tourism activities, TTW and historical/ cultural elements. In addition to that, the study also shows that there are few potentials of SSAF from the perspective of tourism stakeholders; niche products, home-stay, cultural and architectural value, entrepreneurship development, education and research center as well as infrastructures and facilities development. The social, economic and environment elements have been identified as the impact factors that contributed to the development of tourism activities at SSAF. In support of this finding, the results also showed that there are broadly similar views among the participants towards tourism development and their engagement in this industry, thus will put greater emphasis to see more tourism activities, and products will be developed at SSAF. The results also clearly indicate the significant contributions of rural tourism development and there are obvious direct and indirect potentials and contributions of rural tourism that have resulted from an increase in tourism development at SSAF. The partnership between the government, tourism operators, and the local communities in forest management plays an important part for SSAF, especially for the purpose of preserving and conserving the forest and nature. The study also strives to contribute to this growing area of research by bringing wider benefits of rural development to SSAF based on The 10th Malaysian Plan (RMK-10) with a holistic and coordinated approach that boosts the tourism industry. The implication of this is that it is a significant stress on economic, environmental, and socio-cultural roles that affects all the stakeholders. Hence, this study also provides much scope to expand the literature by considering methods to apply the Appreciative Inquiry approach to rural tourism development.
iv
Abstrak tesis yang dikemukakan kepada Senat Universiti Putra Malaysia bagi memenuhi syarat-syarat untuk mendapatkan ijazah Doktor Falsafah (Pelancongan) MENEROKA PEMBANGUNAN LESTARI PELANCONGAN LUAR BANDAR DI HUTAN LIPUR SUNGAI SEDIM, KEDAH DARIPADA PERSPEKTIF PIHAK BERKEPENTINGAN PELANCONGAN
Oleh ROSLIZAWATI CHE AZIZ Januari 2016
ABSTRAK
Pengerusi
: Mohani Binti Abdul, PhD
Fakulti
: Ekonomi dan Pengurusan
Fokus utama kajian ini adalah untuk meneroka pembangunan lestari pelancongan luar bandar di Hutan Lipur Sungai Sedim (SSAF), salah satu destinasi pelancongan terkenal di Malaysia. Lokasi ini terletak di bahagian utara Semenanjung Malaysia, dalam kawasan Sedim dan berdekatan kawasan Karangan, 30km daripada bandar Kulim, Kedah. Tree Top Walk (TTW) atau Kanopi Berjalan Kaki terpanjang di dunia dengan ketinggian 50m dari aras tanah serta 925m panjang, merupakan tarikan utama di SSAF yang memberikan pemandangan alam semula jadi yang menarik. Kajian ini menitikberatkan kepada pembangunan pelancongan semasa dan lampau di SSAF daripada pelbagai perspektif pihak berkepentingan pelancongan iaitu penduduk tempatan, pihak berkuasa, pengusaha serta pelancong. Data kajian telah di kumpul daripada 59 peserta yang terlibat secara langsung dan tidak langsung terhadap aktiviti pelancongan di SSAF. Hasil dapatan diperoleh melalui kaedah temu bual tidak berstruktur dan perbincangan kumpulan berfokus. Pendekatan Appreciative Inquiry v
(AI) telah diaplikasikan sebagai alat ukur baharu untuk tujuan pengumpulan data manakala perisian ATLAS.ti pula digunakan untuk tujuan interpretasi dan analisis data. Hasil kajian mendapati terdapat empat kekuatan SSAF yang perlu diberi tumpuan iaitu sumber alam semula jadi, aktiviti pelancongan eko, TTW selain elemen sejarah dan budaya. Di samping itu, hasil kajian daripada pelbagai perspektif peserta menunjukkan terdapat beberapa potensi SSAF iaitu produk khusus (niche product), inap desa (home-stay), nilai budaya dan seni bina, pembangunan keusahawanan, pusat kajian dan pendidikan serta pembangunan infrastruktur dan kemudahan. Elemen sosial, ekonomi dan persekitaran pula telah dikenal pasti sebagai faktor kesan terhadap pembangunan aktiviti pelancongan di SSAF. Dalam menyokong hasil kajian, dapatan kajian juga mengesahkan bahawa terdapat pandangan umum dan penglibatan yang sama di kalangan peserta kajian dan akan memberikan penekanan yang lebih terhadap pembangunan pelancongan untuk melihat lebih banyak aktiviti pelancongan dan produk dibangunkan di SSAF. Hasil kajian turut menegaskan sumbangan yang besar pembangunan luar bandar secara langsung dan tidak langsung yang terhasil daripada peningkatan pembangunan pelancongan di SSAF. Kerjasama di antara pihak kerajaan, pengusaha pelancongan dan penduduk tempatan memainkan peranan penting di dalam pengurusan hutan di SSAF, terutamanya untuk tujuan pemeliharaan dan pemuliharaan hutan dan alam semula jadi. Kajian ini juga berusaha untuk menyumbang kepada bidang pelancongan yang semakin meningkat penyelidikan dengan membawa manfaat yang lebih luas kepada pembangunan luar bandar di SSAF berdasarkan Rancangan Malaysia Ke-10 (RMK -10) melalui pendekatan holistik dan bersepadu untuk meningkatkan lagi industri pelancongan negara. Implikasi kajian ini juga adalah untuk memberi tekanan yang besar ke atas peranan ekonomi, alam sekitar dan sosio- budaya dan memberi kesan kepada semua pihak yang berkepentingan. Selain itu, kajian ini juga menyediakan banyak skop untuk mengembangkan sorotan literatur dalam kaedah Appreciative Inquiry untuk kajian pembangunan pelancongan luar bandar. vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Over the years, I had many people tell me in several different situations that I was so lucky. Thus, I want to take the opportunity to convey my sincere gratitude to all the people who contributed to the compilation of my thesis, which indeed seemed relatively mammoth in nature. Of course, this exercise warrants the highest degree or praise to my supervisors, Assc. Prof. Dr. Mohani, Assc. Prof. Dr. Yuhanis and Assc. Prof. Dr. Azmawani who worked tirelessly to ensure that the task was exceptionally performed and complemented each other so well. Thank you also for providing valuable feedback and encouragement throughout the work. The much needed advice and support resulted in lasting knowledge that I will be forever grateful for. Thank you, Prof! My deepest gratitude and warmest regards to Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia and Universiti Malaysia Kelantan for giving me the opportunity and granting me the scholarship to undertake this program. Thank you very much! Special thanks to all of my participants and respondents for this project; local residents, authorities, visitors and operators at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest, Kulim, Head of the village, Mr Zulkifli Omar- for enthusiastic support, help and engagement throughout the project. Thank you all! My dearest mother and father, brothers and sisters, thank you for supporting me and believing in me throughout the year, for being patient, giving the strength, inspiration and encouraging me, for your love and care always, anytime…THANK YOU SO MUCH! vii
Special acknowledgements goes to Dr Wee Yu Gee, Dr Hakimin, Mr. Fadil, Naqib, Ida, Dewi, Farha, Fauziah, Noraini, Amin, Azhani, Mashitah, Kak Juma, Zaidah, Sarah, Rosmawati, Asbah, Ummi, Rozy, Atie and all my friends, for their additional efforts (patience, easing my workload, inspiration, special arrangements, loyal accompany and supply of book and food). Many thank for the wonderful and fun days together, for supporting and encouraging me from the beginning at UMK and UPMThank you everyone! Finally, for my lovely sister and best friend, Suriati Hamzah- for being with me and for me, for not giving up listening to my stories and providing me with the amount of motivation that wad needed. Thank you so much! Sincere, Roslizawati Che Aziz Januari 2016 UPM, Malaysia
viii
APPROVAL
I certify that a Thesis Examination Committee has met on 7th January 2016 to conduct the final examination of Roslizawati Che Aziz on her thesis entitled “Development of Sustainable Rural Tourism at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest, Kedah from a Tourism Stakeholders’ Perspective” in accordance with the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 and the Constitution of the Universiti Putra Malaysia [P.U.(A) 106] 15 March 1998. The Committee recommends that the student be awarded the Doctor of Philosophy (Tourism). Members of the Thesis Examination Committee are as follows: Khairil Wahidin Bin Haji Awang, PhD Assoc. Prof. Faculty of Economics and Management University Putra Malaysia (Chairman) Ahmad Bin Shuib, PhD Prof. Institute of Agricultural and Food Policy Studies University Putra Malaysia (Internal Examiner)
Sridar A/L Ramachandran, PhD Assoc. Prof. Faculty of Forestry University Putra Malaysia (Internal Examiner)
Gyan P. Nyaupane, PhD Prof. School of Community Resources and Development Arizona State University, USA (External Examiner) ___________________________ ZULKARNAIN ZAINAL, PHD Professor/ Deputy Dean School of Graduate Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia Date: ix
APPROVAL
This thesis submitted to the Senate of Universiti Putra Malaysia and has been accepted as fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Tourism). The members of the Supervisory Committee were as follows:
Mohani Abdul, PhD Assoc. Prof. Faculty Economic and Management University Putra Malaysia (Chairman)
Yuhanis Abdul Aziz, PhD Assoc. Prof. Faculty Economic and Management University Putra Malaysia (Member)
Azmawani Abd Rahman, PhD Assoc. Prof. Faculty Economic and Management University Putra Malaysia (Member)
___________________________ BUJANG KIM HUAT, PhD Professor and Dean School of Graduate Studies Universiti Putra Malaysia Date:
x
DECLARATION
I hereby confirm that:
this thesis is my original work; quotations, illustrations and citations have been duly referenced; this thesis has not been submitted previously or concurrently for any other degree at any other institutions; intellectual property from the thesis and copyright of thesis are fully-owned by Universiti Putra Malaysia, as according to the Universiti Putra Malaysia (Research) Rules 2012; written permission must be obtained from supervisor and the office of Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research and Innovation) before thesis is published (in the form of written, printed or in electronic form) including books, journals, modules, proceedings, popular writings, seminar papers, manuscripts, posters, reports, lecture notes, learning modules or any other materials as stated in the Universiti Putra Malaysia (Research) Rules 2012; there is no plagiarism or data falsification/fabrication in the thesis, and scholarly integrity is upheld as according to the Universiti Putra Malaysia (Graduate Studies) Rules 2003 (Revision 2012-2013) and the Universiti Putra Malaysia (Research) Rules 2012. The thesis has undergone plagiarism detection software.
Signature: _______________________
Date: __________________
Name and Matric No.: ROSLIZAWATI CHE AZIZ (GS30382)
xi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page ABSTRACT ABSTRAK ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS APPROVAL DECLARATION LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
iii v vii ix xi xv xvii xix
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION 1.1 1.2
1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8
1.9 1.10
Overview Background of the Study 1.2.1 The Provision of Tourism Industry in Kedah 1.2.2 Research Setting: Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest Statement of the Problem Research Objectives Research Questions Scopes of the Study Justification and Significance of the Study Philosopical and Theoretical Underpinnings 1.8.1 Theoretical Knowledge of Appreciative Inquiry 1.8.2 The Application of the Social Exchange Theory Operational Definitions of Concepts Chapter Summary
1 3 8 13 19 22 22 23 25 27 30 32 33 34
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 2.2
2.3
Introduction 2.1.1 Development of Tourism Industry The Provision of Rural Tourism Development 2.2.1 Definition of Rural Tourism 2.2.2 Concept of Rural Tourism 2.2.3 The Strengths and Contributions of Rural Tourism 2.2.4 The Potentials and Opportunities of Rural Tourism 2.2.5 Impact of Rural Tourism Development 2.2.6 Stakeholders in Rural Tourism Development Rural Tourism as a Sustainable Development Alternative 2.3.1 Sustainability for Rural Tourism Development xii
36 37 38 40 45 49 54 61 64 69 71
2.4
2.5
2.6 2.7
3
75 84 94 100 103 104 106 110 112
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
4
2.3.2 Significance of Sustainable Development Appreciative Inquiry Approach 2.4.1 Background of Appreciative Inquiry (AI) approach 2.4.2 The Distinctive of Appreciative Inquiry Approach 2.4.3 The Application and Adaptability of AI approach Applying theories in Rural Tourism Study 2.5.1 The Concept of Stakeholder Theory in Tourism Study 2.5.2 The Social Exchange Theory in Rural Tourism Study Existing Gap in Previous Studies Chapter Summary
Introduction Research Design 3.2.1 Sources of Data 3.2.2 Participants selection Methods, Procedures and Tools for Data Collection 3.3.1 Appreciative Inquiry approach at the site 3.3.2 Focus Group Discussions 3.3.3 Semi-structured Interviews 3.3.4 Validity, Ethics and Instrument Measurement Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data 3.4.1 ATLAS.ti Programme 3.4.2 Thematic analysis and the coding process Chapter Summary
114 117 118 124 126 132 133 135 141 143 146 150
INTERPRETATION OF DATA AND DISCUSSION 4.1 4.2 4.3
4.4
4.5
Introduction 153 Description of Participants 4.2.1 Demographic Profile of Participants 154 The Finding from the Discovery Phase 4.3.1 Strengths and contributions of Rural Tourism at SSAF 156 4.3.2 Potentials and opportunities of Rural Tourism at SSAF 166 4.3.3 Impact of Rural Tourism Development at SSAF 178 4.3.4 Stakeholders’ support on tourism development 186 The Finding from the Dream Phase 4.4.1 Strong Dream Statements by Local Residents 195 4.4.2 Strong Dream Statements by Authorities and Visitors 198 Discussion 4.5.1 The significance of rural tourism development at SSAF 200 4.5.2 The impacts of rural tourism development at SSAF 203 4.5.3 Tourism stakeholders’ support for sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF 207
xiii
4.6
5
4.5.4 Application of AI approach toward sustainable tourism development at SSAF 4.5.5 S.W.O.T + Appreciative Inquiry = S.O.A.R Analysis 4.5.6 The significance of the Social Exchange Theory Chapter Summary
212 216 227 229
IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION 5.1 5.2
5.3 5.4 5.5
Introduction Implications and Recommendations 5.3.1 Recommendations for Communities and Operators 5.3.2 Recommendations for Local Authorities 5.3.3 Strategic Approach towards Rural Tourism 5.3.4 Applying the Concept of Sustainable Tourism Limitations of the Study Recommendations for Future Studies Conclusion
REFERENCES
231 232 233 234 238 241 244 247 248 254
APPENDICES APPENDIX A: RESEARCH SUPPORT APPENDIX B: THE INSTRUMENTS APPENDIX C: RESULTS/ FINDINGS APPENDIX D: DATA COLLECTION PROCESS APPENDIX E: MAP AND RESEARCH LOCATION
274 280 298 329 333
BIODATA OF STUDENT
340
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
341
xiv
LIST OF TABLES
Table
Page
Table 1.1: Number of tourist arrivals from 2004 to 2014 ............................................ 5 Table 1.2: Tourist attractions in Kulim ...................................................................... 15 Table 2.1: Potentials of rural tourism development ................................................... 57 Table 2.2: Key issues in sustainable tourism development ....................................... 79 Table 2.3: The Evolution of AI approach .................................................................. 89 Table 2.4: Appreciative Inquiry vs Traditional approach .......................................... 96 Table 2.5: Eight Foundational Principles of AI ......................................................... 97 Table 2.6: The Powerful tools of AI Approach ......................................................... 99 Table 3.1: Categories of research participants ......................................................... 119 Table 3.2: Categories of Local Communities participants ....................................... 120 Table 3.3: Categories of Local Authorities .............................................................. 121 Table 3.4: Categories of Tourism Operators ............................................................ 122 Table 3.5: Categories of Visitor ............................................................................... 123 Table 3.6: Inquiry strategy of the study ................................................................... 127 Table 4.1: Frequency Distributions of Participants’ Demographic Profile.............. 155 Table 4.2: Summary of Findings for Strengths and Contributions of SSAF* ......... 158 Table 4.3: Summary of Findings for Potentials and Opportunities of SSAF*......... 168 Table 4.4: Potential advantages from rural tourism development at SSAF ............. 177 Table 4.5: Summary of Findings for Tourism Impacts of SSAF* ........................... 179 Table 4.6: Summary of Findings for Stakeholders’ Attitudes and Support * .......... 188 Table 4.7: Different types of participations related to tourism activities ................. 208 Table 4.8: S.O. A. R analysis of tourism development at SSAF ............................. 217 xv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Page
Figure 1.1: Map showing the administrative divisions of Kedah state ........................ 9 Figure 1.2: Arrival of domestic tourists by state, 2013 .............................................. 11 Figure 1.3: Tree Top Walk at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest, Kedah ....................... 17 Figure 1.4: The Main Stakeholders in Rural Tourism ............................................... 24 Figure 2.1: Definition of rural tourism ....................................................................... 40 Figure 2.2: System definitions of rural tourism ......................................................... 43 Figure 2.3: The Concept of rural tourism .................................................................. 47 Figure 2.4: Different forms of rural tourism .............................................................. 48 Figure 2.5: Number of domestic tourists by strata, 2013 and 2014 ........................... 52 Figure 2.6: Total expenditure of domestic tourists by strata, 2013 and 2014 ............ 52 Figure 2.7: Community capacity as a new approach ................................................. 68 Figure 2.8: Equilibrium of sustainable tourism.......................................................... 80 Figure 2.9: Principles of sustainable rural tourism development ............................... 82 Figure 2.10: The 4D’s of Appreciative Inquiry Approach ......................................... 86 Figure 2.11: The W-Holistic of AI Approach ............................................................ 91 Figure 2.12: The proposition underlie the practice of AI........................................... 92 Figure 2.13: The concept of SET in rural tourism study.......................................... 108 Figure 3.1: Flowchart of the steps of the study ........................................................ 117 Figure 3.2: The process and procedures for data collection..................................... 125 Figure 3.3: The Processes of Appreciative Inquiry Approach ................................. 129 Figure 3.4: Qualitative data analysis of the study .................................................... 143 Figure 3.5: The ATLAS.ti workflow ....................................................................... 144 xvi
Figure 3.6: Sample of Text-Structure-Text in ATLAS.ti Program .......................... 145 Figure 3.7: Sample of Conceptual Level Work ....................................................... 146 Figure 3.8: An example of a data being coded in ATLAS.ti. .................................. 149 Figure 4.1: Groups of participants in the study ........................................................ 154 Figure 4.2: Categories of dream statements from participants ................................ 194 Figure 4.3: Summary of Findings from the Dream Phase ....................................... 194 Figure 4.4: Framework for encouraging stakeholders’ support. .............................. 211 Figure 4.5: Driving factors for SSAF’s development .............................................. 222 Figure 4.6: The factors that determine the contributions of sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF............................................................................................... 228 Figure 5.1: Sustainable livelihood framework for rural development ..................... 243
xvii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AI
- Appreciative Inquiry
CED
- Community Economic Development
EPPs
- Entry Point Projects
ETP
- Economic Transformation Programme
FGD
- Focus Group Discussion
GDP
- Gross Domestic Product
GNI
- Gross National Income
HU
- Hermeneutic Unit
LA
- Local Authorities
LC
- Local Communities
MMBH
- Malaysia Mega Biodiversity Hub
MTTP
- Malaysian Tourism Transformation Programme
NCER
- Northern Region Economic Corridor
NGOs
- Non-Governmental Organizations
NKEAs
- National Key Economic Areas
PEMANDU
- Performance Management and Delivery Unit
SEM
- Structured Equation Modelling
SET
- Social Exchange Theory
SME
- Small Medium Enterprise
SOAR
- Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations, and Results
SSAF
- Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest
STD
- Sustainable Tourism Development
xviii
SWOT
- Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats
TO
- Tourism Operators
TIC
- Tourist Information Centres
TTW
- Tree Top Walk
UPEN
- Economic Planning Unit
UNWTO
- United Nation for World Tourism Organization (Formerly known as WTO)
VS
- Visitors
VISE
- Visualization, Integration, Serendipity, and Exploration
WTO
- World Tourism Organization
WWF
- Malaysia World Wide Fund for Nature
WTTC
- World Travel and Tourism Council
YG
- Youth Group
xix
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Overview
Tourism is one of the world’s fastest growing industries and is a major source of income for developing countries. Over the past six decades, the tourism industry has experienced continued expansion and diversification, becoming one of the largest and fastest-growing economic sectors in the world (UNWTO, 2014). According to the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) in their report of “Tourism Towards 2030”, the number of international tourist arrivals worldwide is expected to increase by an average of 3.3 per cent a year over the period of 2010 to 2030. Indeed, Asia and the Pacific are identified as having the strongest growth (by region), where arrivals are forecast to increase from 331 million in 2010, reaching up to 535 million in 2030. In addition, the tourism industry also benefits from the continuing globalization process in which travel has been driven by the rising purchasing power of the growing middle class in many developing economies (Blanke & Chiesa, 2013). Tourism was also acknowledged as an increasingly important industry, which creates new products and well-managed tourism destinations. Over the years, the industry has experienced sustained growth and also been an area of significant development in recent years (UNWTO, 2014). Thus, in order for tourism to be a catalyst for socioeconomic development, it is essential that governments pursue the sustainable development of tourism in a comprehensive and planned manner (United-Nations, 2006). Tourism will continue to develop as a significant social and economic activity
(UNWTO, 2011; WTTC, 2012a). A recent report by UNWTO (2015), the number of international tourists (overnight visitors) reached 1,138 million in 2014, 51 million more than in 2013. With an increase of 4.7%, this is the fifth consecutive year of above average growth since the 2009 economic crisis. This shows that this industry is more powerful than other sectors when it comes to converting spending into incomes and jobs. In fact, this industry also offers many job opportunities that help to revitalise local economies that otherwise have few choices in participating in the global economy (WTTC, 2014b). Although many countries are suffering from high unemployment, it is important to encourage the development of tourism sectors, especially in regards to creating jobs (Blanke & Chiesa, 2013). With this contribution in mind, this chapter is divided into sub-sections in order to discuss current issues and tourism development related to this study. The first part is an introduction to the industry, which relates to the background of this study and some issues that should be discussed in analysing rural tourism development. Subsequently, the objectives, research questions, the scope of the study, justification, and significance of this study will be discussed. The operational definitions for this study will be highlighted in the last section.
2
1.2
Background of the Study
The tourism industry in Malaysia has achieved such a leading position that it counts as one of the most important sources of income and foreign exchange. This growth will continue in the future and will contribute to make tourism the most significant industry in the world (Kayat, 2011). Besides, the industry is, like no other industry, in a position to create prosperity and economic development opportunities. Since 2000, Malaysia has launched the Economic Transformation Programme (ETP) with the intention to tap the growth potential of tourism, as well as to realise Malaysia’s aspiration of becoming a high-income country by 2020 (Ministry of Tourism Malaysia, 2013). As a result, the tourism industry recently was acknowledged as a major contributor to Malaysia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), with an average growth rate of 12 per cent per annum since 2004 (PEMANDU, 2013). Recent statistics by the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) stated that this sector contributed significantly to the economy because it accounted for about RM61 billion, or 5.7 per cent of the total GDP in 2014. It is also expected to rise by 5.6 per cent in 2015, about RM95.9 billion or 5.8 per cent of total GDP for 2025 (WTTC, 2015). The Performance Management and Delivery Unit (PEMANDU), however, highlighted that in 2014, tourism was the sixth highest contributor to the Malaysian economy. The country continues to see new records set, with tourism arrivals growing by 6.7 per cent to 27.4 per cent and receipts at RM72 billion compared to RM65.4 billion in 2013 (PEMANDU, 2015). Globally, tourism will continue to experience development and diversification, remaining a top growth sector in the world economy. However, the increasingly dynamic landscape of the sector will require industry 3
players to step out of their traditional roles, to meet evolving demand for products aligned with the modern traveller’s lifestyle needs. Malaysia will aim to intensify marketing and promotional efforts to create greater product differentiation with experiential offerings that deliver unique cultural identity and greater perceived (PEMANDU, 2015). With the implementation of ETP, tourism has been identified as one of the National Key Economic Areas (NKEAs). The Malaysian Tourism Transformation Programme (MTTP) was formulated to achieve the target of attracting 36 million international tourists and generating RM168 billion in terms of tourists’ receipts (Ministry of Tourism Malaysia, 2013). This strategic ambition will be achieved through, inter alia, the 12 Entry Point Projects (EPPs) proposed under the Tourism NKEA. As a result, it was reflected in the growth of tourist arrivals and tourist earnings, indicated significantly increased the number of tourist arrivals from 15.7 million in 2004 to 27.44 million in 2014. Similarly to the total tourism receipts, which showed a dramatic increased from RM29.7 billion in 2004 to RM72 billion in 2013 over the period of 10 years performance (see Table 1.1).
4
Table 1.1: Number of tourist arrivals from 2004 to 2014
Source: Tourism Malaysia (2015) The contribution of tourism to Malaysia’s economy can be measured from the Malaysian tourism satellite accounts. It is estimated that tourism industry in Malaysia will be increased by 2.1 times, by contributing RM115 billion in receipts and providing two million jobs within the industry in 2015 (PEMANDU, 2011). Due to its historical locations, sites, and its natural attractions, Malaysia was recognised among the top 10th most touristic countries in the world (WTTC, 2012c). Recently, with the immense growth industry, Malaysian tourism is representing the only Asian country to have made the cut in Lonely Planet’s “Best in Travel 2014 - Top 10 Countries”, ranking 10th on the list. It is also ranked by Singapore’s Crescent Rating as the world’s best Muslim travel destination in 2013 (PEMANDU, 2013). As a result, the tourism industry made Malaysia the most attractive holiday destination in the ASEAN region (WTTC, 2012b).
5
In the future, the government will be focusing on how to enhance the country’s position as a leading foreign tourist destination while continuing to focus on high-yield tourism and employment growth for the nation. Despite these targets, several issues need to be addressed. These include the need to develop vibrant and iconic tourism products, improving maintenance of existing tourism sites, and adopting focused tourism promotions (Department of Statistics, 2013). Indeed, cooperative effort between the public and private sectors is crucial in maximising tourism sector growth. It is believed that holistic partnership also enables Malaysia to be ranked as the 10 th most visited country in the global arena (PEMANDU, 2013). In order to achieve these targets, the focus will be on attracting a larger share of high spending travellers and capturing a higher share of high growth segments particularly from Russia, India, China and the Middle East (PEMANDU, 2013). Nature, in the form of the rainforest/jungle is identified to be Malaysia’s main strength (WTO, 2001). In addition, a recent study by World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF) found that nature-based activities are the fastest-growing tourism product in Malaysia. In fact, nature tourism represents 35 per cent of tourist arrivals per year and currently makes up 10 per cent of the country’s tourism revenue (WWF, 2012). Thus, the Ministry of Tourism Malaysia is actively involved in promoting rural tourism activities in which the National Eco-Tourism Plan and Rural Tourism Master Plan was formulated to promote, encourage and enhance the community-based tourism program (WTO, 2001). The plan also encourages rural dwellers to open up their areas for tourists to experience rural activities.
6
The potentials of developing tourism activities in rural areas cannot be overemphasised and recently became an interesting field for further understanding of a gap in literature. Tourism in rural areas upstages an increase of benefits receivable from tourism activities that will help local residents and ensure synergy between tourism development and biodiversity conservation (Sadler, 2004). Indeed, tourism experience is also very important for rural areas that need to develop appealing and distinctive offerings for a demanding and heterogeneous tourism market (Maria & Loureiro, 2014). Therefore, an integrated framework or model for maximising benefits from tourism development is needed to show how tourism can directly support community development and conservation efforts (García-Rosell & Mäkinen, 2012). In recent years, researchers show an increased interest in analysing rural tourism development all over the world, such as China, India, and Russia and even in Malaysia. A considerable amount of literature was published in tourism journals, which are mainly concerned with the significance of this industry towards tourism stakeholders (Tian, Lee & Law, 2011). For those reasons, this study intends to explore the development of rural tourism from the tourism stakeholders’ perspective, which has greater contributions towards tourism development. This was focuses specifically on the prospects of Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (hereafter SSAF) in Kulim, Kedah, one of the best eco-tourism destinations in Malaysia (Tourism Malaysia, 2010; UPEN, 2009). The current study explores the past and current scenario of tourism development that encourages growth of rural tourism by highlighting those who complain about the inconclusiveness of the evidence and the subsequent dearth of understanding of
7
economic and social viabilities of rural tourism. This ambivalence should be quieted by the sheer advantages of involving rural communities in tourism activities at SSAF. This study also focuses on the significant impacts and perceptions of developing tourism products in rural areas with a concern for tourism stakeholders that are directly involved in tourism activities. It is important to highlight their opinions, ideas and experiences regarding the development of tourism activities within the area because they are considered to be major players and resource for successful tourism development (Imran, Alam & Beaumont, 2014).
1.2.1 The Provision of Tourism Industry in Kedah
Kedah, which is one of the oldest states in Malaysia, has a population of 1.5 million people comprised of various ethnicities (Kerajaan Negeri Kedah, 2013). Kedah has many historical heritages and is rich in natural resources that have the potential to be developed as tourism products. In the early 1990s, the Kedah State Government gave serious attention to the tourism industry due its ability to generate economic growth, creating more job opportunities and changing the rural development landscape (Kulim District Council, 2004). Vision 2020 gave Malaysian citizens a clear direction, hope, and aspiration to achieve fully developed country status by the year 2020. In line with that national goal, Kedah State formulated a long-term development plan that aims at transforming Kedah into a developed state by the year 2020 (Ibrahim & Ahmad, 2008). Tourism Malaysia is intensifying its efforts in promoting tourism products in Kedah where two tourism packages, Alor Setar City Tour and Royal Heritage Trail, are able to lure tourists away from other destinations (Bernama, 2011b). Many breath-taking
8
tourism products in Kedah remain outside most tourists’ notice. They include, but are not restricted to, The Greater Ulu Muda, Baling Hot Spring, Jerai Mountain, Pedu Lake and Kuala Muda. Also, the uniqueness of these natural resources and heritage products such as Paddy Museums, Lembah Bujang, and Alor Setar Tower are amongst the most popular tourist attractions in Kedah, yet remain to be maximally explored (Kerajaan Negeri Kedah, 2013). With comparatively advantageous effects on income and employment generation in Kedah, the tourism industry is an option for enhancing rural lifestyles and for inducing positive changes in the distribution of income in underprivileged areas (Liu, 2006). Further information about Kedah state is provided in Appendix E1.
Figure 1.1: Map showing the administrative divisions of Kedah state Source: Kerajaan Negeri Kedah (2013) The tourism industry in Kedah has diverse attractions, a variety of natural resources, historical heritage, and even the World’s Longest Tree Top Walk (hereafter TTW) at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (Tourism Development Council, 2012). It also has great
9
potential for tourism development, especially in cultural and natural touristic segments. Tourism products in Kedah are also unique and offered in specific locations for tourists. Opportunities are abound for entrepreneurs, business owners and investors who support the government’s direction as Kedah has some of the most attractive holiday destinations in the world (PEMANDU, 2011). Therefore, Kedah is starting to receive benefits from tourism industry development because of an increasing number of tourists are arriving each year (Ibrahim & Ahmad, 2008). Tourism development in Kedah has changed its physical landscape, especially in rural and remote areas. Since 1990, the Kedah state focused on industrial development, tourism and commercial agriculture sectors (UPEN, 2009). Political stability in the state is a major contributing factor to the economic growth in the form of foreign and local investments in industry, tourism, and infrastructure sectors flourish throughout the state (UPEN, 2009). As a result, Kedah has successfully transformed its economic structure from an agricultural base towards an industrial base (Kulim District Council, 2004). Nevertheless, over the past few years, the tourist arrival trend to Malaysia in particular has changed development of the tourism industry in Kedah, where the number of tourist arrivals has dropped significantly, and this has raised alarms. The number of visitors to the state of Kedah has declined since 2007 from a total of 4.5 million to 3.8 million in 2008 and 2009 (Bernama, 2011a). The situation is even more alarming when in 2010, the number of tourists declined to 2.7 million (Jaafar, 2010; Manikumar, 2011). Meanwhile, according to the Domestic Tourism Survey (2011), which tracks the number of tourist arrivals by state, declared that Kedah received the highest number of domestic tourists in 2011, about 5.12 million. But this
10
number decreased again in 2013 by approximately 4.47 million tourists (Department of Statistics, 2011, 2013), as shown in Figure 1.2.
Figure 1.2: Arrival of domestic tourists by state, 2013 Source: Department of Statistics (2013)
This change is quite surprising because the state has one of the most recognisable tourist destinations of the country, i.e. Langkawi Island, as compared to the other states in Malaysia. Does the change in tourist arrivals in Kedah mean that Langkawi Island is somehow declining, or should the state consider promoting other tourism products that are related to Kedah? In the past, the majority of local residents worked in the agricultural sectors. However, situations have changed towards the service sector when locals became actively involved in the tourism industry. Unemployment and poverty rates in Langkawi Island have declined considerably as a result of the many and relatively well-paying job opportunities available in the tourism industry (Bernama, 2010). As a result, tourism development in Langkawi Island is succeeding in adding value to the people’s socio-economic status and is opening their minds to change and improving their knowledge in tourism.
11
Various incentives are provided by the Kedah government to attract tourists to Langkawi Island and make the legendary island a major destination for tourists in the State (Bernama, 2013). In fact, the tourism industry in Langkawi Island has changed the economic activities for local people. Langkawi Island development illustrates that tourism can also be an impetus affecting upward structural shifts in a rural economy, but its momentum can only be sustained and effective if there are conditions to stimulate changes (UPEN, 2009). With this mind, it is believed that if the tourism industry in Langkawi Island could be planned and managed properly, then the local government also should take the same strategies in order to improve and enhance the development of SSAF, in addition to the local communities’ benefits. With the diverse segments of tourism activities in Kedah (e.g. homestay, agro-tourism and eco-tourism) the State Government should encourage greater involvement of the local residents and required commitments be given to the provision of education and training opportunities to the rural residents (Liu, 2006). Although Kedah relies solely on the industrialisation and tourism development, the State Government has realigned several policies and strategies, namely: the Kedah as Developed State Policy 2010, Kedah Structured Plan 2002-2020 and Northern Region Economic Corridor (NCER) 2007-2025 (Economic Planning Unit, 2009). However, the challenges remain daunting. These plans can be implemented to evaluate the development direction of Kedah State in the next decade in addition to promoting tourism development in the state (Liu, 2006).
12
Tourism activities are suitable to remote or non-urban areas, if there is sufficient access for tourists. Additionally, the development of tourism is capable of developing rural areas, thereby reducing the gap and disparities in income between rural and urban people. It also solves some of the economic challenges that are related to depopulation caused by migration of rural population to urban centres (Ciolac, Csosz, Merce, Balan & Dincu, 2011; Paniagua, 2002). The issues of tourism planning and rural development in Kedah State generally should be given special attention as one of the efforts to promote transformation of economic development of the rural population. Local people and entrepreneurs, particularly in rural areas, should not be reluctant towards the positive effects of tourism because there is significant potential for economic growth, jobs, business and entrepreneurship opportunities, infrastructural development, high quality facilities and services in Kedah State. Therefore, this study strives to fill the gap in knowledge regarding these particular issues to ensure the synergy that exists between the sustainable development of the tourism industry and livelihood improvement, (especially for rural dwellers) is best understood and acted upon.
1.2.2 Research Setting: Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (SSAF), Kulim, Kedah
Kulim is one of the small towns in Kedah that has several great attractions, particularly eco-tourism sites and its interestingly unique natural landscape with 13 existing tourist destinations. In addition, 25 areas committed for development have been identified as a source of tourist attractions. Of those, 17 areas are classified as new destinations while another eight are targeted for upgrading. With the overwhelming and rapid
13
industrial development in Kulim, exemplified by Malaysia's first high-tech drive in Kulim Hi-Tech Park, investment from abroad in the form of developing high-tech factories has introduced thousands of jobs to the local people, especially for rural communities (Kulim District Council, 2004). There is a dramatic increase in population and rapid growth in this area. As an industrial city, Kulim has a wide range of features that meets basic needs such as a good road network. The Kulim-Butterworth Highway is a primary basis for attracting investors in the town of Kulim. This was seen in 2000 when the State developed an integrated development plan to transform Kedah into a developed state by the year 2020. In addition, there is the Kedah State Structure Plan 2002-2020 and the Northern Corridor Economic Region 2007- 2025, which aims to mobilize and stimulate economic growth and further develop the tourism industry (Kulim District Council, 2013). The state government estimates the number of tourists to Kulim’s areas will increase to 109,500 tourists in 2020 compared to a total of 26,280 tourists in 2004, based on a 40 per cent rate of hotel accommodation in Kulim (Kulim District Council, 2004). Kulim district is the third most important city in Kedah after Alor Setar and Sungai Petani (Kulim District Office, 2011). It has a variety of tourism assets and products to be offered and promoted either nationally or internationally. Among the most valuable products in this area are clear waterfalls, unspoilt natural forests, stately mountains and various agricultural products. Because of various tourism products that exist in Kulim and the development of the State's tourism, the industry is booming. Not surprisingly, the State Government is giving serious attention to making Kulim into the rural
14
tourism and eco-tourism destination of choice in Malaysia (Kulim District Council, 2004). Rapid development in this area has introduced many to further developing rural tourism in Malaysia. Further information about Kulim district can be seen in Appendix E2 whereas Table 1.2 shows the most valuable tourist attractions in Kulim district: Table 1.2: Tourist attractions in Kulim Tourism destinations Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest
Types of attraction Eco and agrotourism
Gunung Bintang
Eco-tourism
Products River, natural resources, rapid - Sport facilities for adventure activities (water rafting, kayak) - Natural forest/ mountain - Flora and fauna - Accommodation for tourists - Workshop and training centre - Agro- tourism centre - Natural forest - Mountain/ Flora and fauna - River and waterfall
Ulu Paip
Eco-tourism -
Pahau
Natural forest Mountain/ Flora and fauna River and waterfall Workshop and training centre
Eco-tourism - R & D Centre/ Education - Mountain/ Flora and fauna - Workshop and training centre
Gunung Bongsu
Eco-tourism - Natural forest/Mountain/ Flora and fauna - River and waterfall - Historical monuments - Workshop and training centre - Agro centre
Right Paddy Scheme Areas
Agro-tourism - Agro- tourism centre 15
- Aquatic resources/ waterfall - Feathered animals Source: Kulim Municipal Council (2004, 2013) With an abundance of natural touristic resources and good infrastructural facilities, Kulim has great potential to be promoted as a new eco-tourism destination. It will contribute to a positive impact and improve the local community’s socio-economic standards (Kulim District Council, 2004). Realising that most tourist attractions are dependent on renewable natural and heritage resources, preservation and conservation efforts should be carried out properly and continuously. Five key elements are identified and will be focused on through the blueprint of product development namely; position the tourism assets, smart partnership, promotion and event presentation in line with national tourism policy and planning. Indeed, the formulation of policy and blueprint have impetus for positive direction of travel (Jaafar, 2010b). Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (SSAF), one of the most popular destinations in Kulim, was chosen as the research setting due to its characteristics and future contributions to host residents. It was recognized as one of the “Top Five Chosen Destinations in Asia Pacific” with 24 waterfall cascades along a 15 kilometre stretch (Kulim District Office, 2011). The forest is located in the north of Peninsular Malaysia, within Sedim’s area and near Karangan, 30km from Kulim’s town. The World’s Longest Canopy Walk, the 925m long and 50m high Tree Top Walk (TTW), is among the best attractions at SSAF and offers great aerial views of the natural forest (Kulim District Council, 2013).
16
The potential of SSAF to be the best eco-tourism destinations in Malaysia can be seen from the rich, natural resource base that includes an adventurous waterfall that was promoted as being among the best white water rafting challenges internationally (Kulim District Council, 2013; Tourism Development Council, 2012). In addition to this, it has a rich combination of tourism endowments, such as forest recreational park, waterfalls, and mountains. Adventurous visitors can test their endurance by taking on the rapids with rafting, kayaking, or canoeing while the less daring can opt for soft adventure activities. Having the world’s longest Tree Top Walk, SSAF also offers various types of eco-tourism activities like bird-watching, education tourism and research centre visits (Kulim District Office, 2014).
Figure 1.3: Tree Top Walk at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest, Kedah Source: Kulim District Council (2004)
17
In addition, according to the Kedah Tourism Board, the SSAF, as well as the Merbok River Cruise, are expected to attract more tourists to the mainland of Kedah. This will help the tourism industry to create a more balanced inflow of tourists to the state (PEMANDU, 2009). The tourism board also will be continuously promoting Kedah’s eco-tourism products on a low-key basis in the future and will be waiting for the government to improve the basic infrastructure in SSAF like public toilets, changing rooms as well as small shelters for the visitors. Tourism has become the priority tool of rural planning at SSAF, which tourism helps to energize the rural economy and plays an important role in creating a value-added commercial channel for local produce. One of the most significant current discussions related to the prospects and future development at SSAF is the nature of tourism products at SSAF, such as the adventure’s waterfall and surrounding pristine forest. This often involves small-scale operations and the availability of culturally based or farm-based products can be conducive to wide community participation. There are also reasons why it is important to develop SSAF as a rural tourism destination in Kedah, namely: (i) to create economic growth and outline environmental objectives and (ii) to improve the social conditions of the local communities and tourism operators. Besides that, tourism development at SSAF can bring a range of other benefits to Kulim’s areas, such as infrastructural development and spin-off enterprise opportunities. There are developmental reasons to promote tourism at SSAF as a growth pole, such as diversifying a state’s tourism image and travel packages or alleviating bottlenecks in popular sites. One key opportunity of involving more of the people in tourism
18
activities at SSAF is to develop tourism enterprises where they live. Nevertheless, this is not to say that they will necessarily own an enterprise or even provide the labour just because it is located in a rural area. In this context, sustainable development is one of the best alternatives to be practiced and adopted in any tourism-related development, particularly in SSAF. Thus, various stakeholders must be assisted through capacity building in order to involve the local community in developing a sound tourism development plan that has potential for generating positive outputs to all (Ibrahim & Ahmad, 2008).
1.3
Statement of the Problem
The Kedah government, under the State Economic Planning Unit (UPEN), built the TTW at SSAF in 2004 at a cost of more than RM10 million, which includes costs for the main road (The National Audit Department, 2012). TTW at SSAF could best be promoted not only through its natural scenery but also as the world’s longest TTW that could only be experienced at SSAF (Tourism Malaysia, 2010; UPEN, 2009). Additionally, the Kedah Tourism State allocated more than RM1 million in 2009 through UPEN to build 20 chalets, parking areas as well as a Tourist Information Centre (TIC) that consists of an information centre, public toilets and a cafeteria (The National Audit Department, 2012). Nevertheless, both projects have not been able to promote and attract an adequate number of tourists to SSAF and its performance is still lagging despite being considered the most valuable product in Malaysia (Kulim District Council, 2004).
19
Despite this, according to the top management of TTW, there are no current and specific statistics or published data available that shows the number of tourists visiting SSAF nor the gross revenue or income of the project. Debate continues about the adequacies of SSAF’s management and coordination, based on the National Audit Report 2012 (Series 1) by National Audit Department. There are four significant current issues that were highlighted in this report, which focused to the Forestry Department of Kedah, UPEN as well as the Kedah Tourism State. These issues are: 1. 2. 3. 4.
SSAF has not yet been gazetted as State Reserved Forestry, Incomplete of the management contracts/agreements, Unattended and uselessness of infrastructures and facilities provided, and Poor services maintenance by responsible parties
(The National Audit Department, 2012, p.13) In addition, SSAF is also slightly disadvantaged compared to other areas like Baling, Ulu Muda and Langkawi because it has not been chosen by the Kedah State to be included in the Malaysia Rural Tourism Master Plan and Nature Tourism Development Project. It has not received the attention and recognition of the United Nations Development Programme, World Tourism Organization (WTO), as well as WWF. Although there are various tourist attractions on the mainland of Kedah that can be promoted, a greater emphasis has been given to the development of Langkawi Island (The Jeweller of Kedah) to make the legendary island into a major destination for tourists (Bernama, 2010, 2011a). More attention also has been given to the development Ulu Muda Forests (the Greater Forest), Ulu Legong Forest, Kuala Muda district, Pedu Lake and Homestay programme (Bernama, 2011; Ibrahim and Ahmad,
20
2008; Liu, 2006), where various incentives have been provided by the State Government to attract tourists. As highlighted before, there is more to Kedah than just Langkawi Island. A total of 20,000 copies of a brochure on tourism packages available in Kedah, including SSAF, were distributed by tour operators to promote tourism in the state as they believed that most of the tourists were still unaware of the attractive tourism products available on the Kedah mainland (Bernama, 2011b). Indeed, the Kedah State Government also received numerous enquiries from these operators for diversification of their packages that will include more eco-tourism sites and heritage attractions, not only focusing on Langkawi (Bernama, 2011b). To date, there have been few discussions and agreements on the potentials and contributions of SSAF as well as no formal documentation related to the development of SSAF. Although extensive strategies have been carried out to promote the tourism industry in Kedah, little attention has been paid to strategize and develop SSAF. Hence, the development of rural tourism at SSAF has been dislocated as an unfulfilled promise in spilling over the income to tourism stakeholders besides providing indigenous people with employment. With those matters, SSAF was chosen as the research setting due to its characteristics and potential contributions to host residents. Research site selection was specifically based on several criteria, including significant employment declines in natural resources sectors and their locations in areas characterized by the presence of mountains, river, and other natural amenities. In order to address these challenges, therefore, appropriate actions need to be taken and ways to deal with these challenges are needed. There is the need to strategize. A planned action for implementation
21
ensures tourism development especially SSAF area remains strong and sustainable. It is hoped that the findings of this study may offer ways to overcome the economic, social, and environmental challenges and create a better understanding of the potential of rural tourism in Malaysia.
1.4
Research Objectives
The general objective of this study is to explore the development of sustainable rural tourism at SSAF from the perspectives of local stakeholders (i.e. local communities, local authorities, tourism operators, and visitors). Specific objectives are as follows: 1.
To identify the strengths and contributions of sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF
2.
To reveal the potentials and opportunities of sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF
3.
To examine the impact of sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF from stakeholders’ perspective
4.
To describe the tourism stakeholders’ support towards sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF
1.5
Research Questions
This study attempts to focus on the following questions: 1.
What are the strengths and potentials of sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF from tourism stakeholders’ perspective? 22
2.
What are the impacts of sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF from stakeholders’ perspective?
3.
How do tourism stakeholders’ support the development of sustainable rural tourism at SSAF?
1.6
Scope of the Study
This study primarily includes the local communities and tourism operators that live in Sedim area in addition to the visitors and the local authorities of Kedah that are involved in tourism development there. There are only seven tourism operators that are managing and offering their services at SSAF, which consists of accommodation providers (chalet, camping site, and resort), adventure activities (water rafting, kayaking etc.), the TTW operator, as well as parking services. Most of these operators started their business in 2000, although the development of TTW was recognised on September 2006. As one of the best eco-tourism products in Malaysia, the main target of stakeholders of this study consists of four main players in the tourism industry (see Figure 1.4). The Tourism Development Council (2012) highlighted that cooperation and support between the different stakeholder groups is important so that sustainable rural tourism development can be attained. Indeed, listening to stakeholders’ voices as well as the perception of benefits and expectations of stakeholders should be considered in order to determine the significance of tourism development within their area.
23
Figure 1.4: The Main Stakeholders in Rural Tourism Source: Nair, Munikrishnan, Rajaratnam & King (2014) 1. Stakeholders of the sites: These consist of community leaders, local communities/residents and youth that are directly and/or indirectly involved in tourism activities, as well as the hosts and providers of the tourism attractions and activities. 2. Tourism Operators/Entrepreneurs: These are people who are involved in and running the businesses (products or services) related to tourism activities at the site/area. Businesspersons play important roles as ‘core players’ in rural tourism in delivering products or services. 3. Government/local authorities: These include the people responsible for planning, resourcing, and maintaining the basic infrastructures and draw the strategic approaches for sustainable rural tourism development in Kedah 4. Tourists/Visitors:
These are the main consumers of rural
tourism
attractions/activities whom visit rural areas and rural attractions in order to experience the culture and heritage at rural areas.
24
1.7
Justification and Contributions of the Study
The present study differs from others in the same area of study in a few general perspectives. First, the study focused on Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest, Kulim that is hindered by many factors. SSAF has been neglected by many parties, especially in tourism development, and is characterized by a low level of infrastructural development as well as a lack of access to essential services. Thus, greater effort should be taken to provide a wider variety of quality tourism products and improve an image of SSAF to stimulate continuous tourism demand nationally and internationally. Secondly, the study strives to contribute to this growing area of research by bringing wider benefits of rural development to SSAF based on The 10th Malaysian Plan (RMK-10) with a holistic and coordinated approach that boosts the tourism industry (Economic Planning Unit, 2010). The implication of this is that it is significant stress on economic, environmental, and socio-cultural roles that affects all the stakeholders. A number of reasons also support the choice of this topic. First, it should serve as better contribution to the old and on-going debate regarding whether the development and the potential of rural tourism are considerably important. The study has gone some way towards enhancing our understanding towards the current of body of knowledge by exploring the contributions of rural tourism on the development of rural activities at SSAF. The study also contributes to the tourism field in finding out about the importance of developing rural tourism as a key player for local communities’ economic advantage. Moreover, it is hoped that this study may contribute to the body of knowledge on rural tourism by finding out about the role and significance of
25
sustainable tourism in enhancing the local communities’ understanding and their perceptions towards the rural tourism. In addition, there are also other reasons why it is important to develop SSAF as a rural tourism destination in Kedah, as well as to create economic growth and outline environmental objectives. The outcomes of this study are potentially to create and implement a high awareness and enthusiasm among tourism stakeholders on tourism potentials and opportunities at SSAF, such as home-stay operators, tour guides, as well as providing learning support. In addition, the study also offers some important insights into the development of tourism at SSAF. These included the ability to help tourism authorities and policy makers to formulate the state’s development strategies without alienating SSAF community members or degrade the area’s pristine beauty. This study also attempts to provide an important opportunity to advance the responsibility of maintenance and improvement of services offered at SSAF as they have very ‘expensive’ products – Tree Top Walk and Tourist Information Centres, upgrading public facilities such as public toilets and a prayer room, accessibility from Kulim to SSAF, and telephone and internet network among others. The study thus may improve the image and status of SSAF in the eyes of tourists, either domestically or internationally. If more tourism activities can be developed in SSAF, particularly in ways that involve high local participation in decisions and enterprises, then chances are that it will have a positive effect on livelihoods and ameliorate poverty. Furthermore, the development of SSAF as a rural tourism destination has the capacity to reduce out-migration and possibly increase re-population of local residents, particularly for the younger generation besides creating a competitive spirit, sense of
26
entrepreneurialism and sense of belonging towards people and/or Malaysian assetsowned for future generations. In addition, the development of rural tourism at SSAF also may provide more choices/opportunities
available
from
different
eco-products
via
an
organised/structured management of eco-tourism, nature as well as culture and heritage. Indeed, various activities also could be introduced at SSAF that are not available at other eco sites, such as TTW and white water rafting, which have been declared as the best products in Malaysia. Eco-tourists or visitors at SSAF can engage more with local people in building up and sustaining their economy besides raising their own awareness of the Sedim’s local environment and culture as they have various products and activities that can be offered to tourists. The findings are also aimed to make an important contribution for better understanding the potential of rural tourism, particularly in SSAF using the application of AI approach.
1.8
Philosophical and Theoretical Underpinnings
The research design process in qualitative research begins with philosophical assumptions that the inquirers make in deciding to undertake a qualitative study. In addition, researchers bring their own worldviews, paradigms, or sets of beliefs to the research project, and these inform the conduct and writing of the qualitative study. Further, in many approaches to qualitative research, the researchers use interpretive and theoretical frameworks to further shape the study. Good research requires making these assumptions, paradigms, and frameworks explicit in the writing of a study, and, at a minimum, to be aware that they influence the conduct of inquiry (Creswell, 2007).
27
He added that there are five main philosophical assumptions that may lead to an individual's choice of qualitative research, which is ontology, epistemology, axiology, rhetorical, and methodological assumptions. Thus, the qualitative researcher has to choose a stance on each of these assumptions, and the choice has practical implications for designing and conducting research. In the choice of this study, the researcher believed that inquirer makes certain assumptions, which relates to the nature of reality and its characteristics. When researcher conducts the qualitative research, we are embracing the idea of multiple realities, thus, may lead to the ontology philosophical assumptions. When studying individuals, the qualitative researcher conducted a study with the intent of reporting these multiple realities. Evidence of multiple realities includes the use of multiple quotes based on the actual words of different individuals and presenting different perspectives from individuals (Creswell, 2007). According to Creswell (2007, 2009), the procedures of qualitative research, or its methodology, are characterized as inductive, emerging, and shaped by the researcher's experience in collecting and analysing the data. The logic that the qualitative researcher follows is inductive, from the ground up, rather than handed down entirely from a theory or from the perspectives of the inquirer. Sometimes the research questions change in the middle of the study to reflect better the types of questions needed to understand the research problem. In response, the data collection strategy, planned before the study, needs to be modified to accompany the new questions. During the data analysis, however, the researcher follows a path of analysing the data to develop an increasingly detailed knowledge of the topic being studied.
28
After researchers make this choice, they then further shape their research by bringing to the inquiry paradigms or worldviews. Paradigms used by qualitative researchers vary with the set of beliefs they bring to research, and the types have continually evolved over time (contrast the paradigms of Denzin and Lincoln, 1994, with the paradigms of Denzin and Lincoln, 2005 in Creswell, 2007). Individuals may also use multiple paradigms in their qualitative research that are compatible, such as constructionist and participatory worldviews. In addition to that, Creswell (2003) also highlighted four major worldviews that inform qualitative research and identify how these worldviews shape the practice of research. The four are positivist, post- positivist, critical and interpretive. However, after study these four paradigms, the researcher found that interpretive view would be useful as this paradigm turn the conventional positivistic approach to knowing upon its head. Rather than arguing that only the qualified researcher is capable of knowledge production they consider that the complex social world can be understood only from the point of view of those who operate within it (Jenny Phillmore & Goodson, 2004). Thus, research is undertaken in a collaborative fashion, with the researcher and the researched viewed as partners in the production of knowledge and the interaction between them being a key site for both research and understanding. The critical roles of both values and context in knowledge production mean that these two aspects of the research process have to be explored in some depth. This means undertaking research in a reflexive way whereby ethical, political, and epistemological dimensions of research are explored as an integral part of producing knowledge (Marcus 1998). From this perspective, only through openly reflexive interpretation
29
validity can be claimed for any research, regardless of whether it is quantitative or qualitative. Although the qualitative methods have become more widely used and, arguably, more accepted as a legitimate approach to research, however, it would appear that many researchers are still operating within the boundaries of a limited range of epistemological, ontological and methodological frameworks.
1.8.1 Theoretical Knowledge of Appreciative Inquiry (AI) Approach
This study also provides much scope to expand the literature by considering methods to apply the Appreciative Inquiry approach to rural tourism development at SSAF. Study of stakeholders’ perceptions concerning the development of rural tourism using the AI approach has contributed to the ‘knowledge rich’ tourism field. AI is a new approach and only a limited numbers of studies have been conducted, particularly in Malaysia, using this approach. Indeed, there are also limited studies that have been conducted using the AI approach within the tourism field (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012; Raymond & Hall, 2008b). Thus, it is important for tourism practitioners to extend AI into the field of tourism to create a focus on the strengths of a system instead of using deficit-based thinking (Raymond & Hall, 2008). The detail of information of associated with the AI approach will be further discussed in the Chapter 2 (section 2.4) of this study. The current study aims to contribute to the body of knowledge within tourism’s method whereby the empirical findings from this study may provide a new understanding of the theoretical knowledge on AI in rural communities. Moreover, the methods that were used in this study provide extensive potential to discover the
30
strengths in developing rural tourism as well as to demonstrate a vision that creates an ecologically healthy and sustainable learning community (Raymond & Hall, 2008b). This was done at SSAF by implementing the 4-D Cycles in which all stakeholders were empowered throughout the process. The extensions of AI methodology into the field of tourism were done through the involvement of rural communities, tourism entrepreneurs, community’s leaders, as well as tourism officers. Indeed, the use of AI as a research methodology in this study is to provide an alternative approach to view the field of tourism by focusing on the strengths of the system instead of focusing on the weaknesses of the community. Cooperrider and Srivastva (1987) stated that inquiry into the social potential of a social system should begin with appreciation, should be collaborative, should be provocative and should be applicable. Thus, the original approach of AI consisted of a collective process; (i) discovery process-grounded observation, (ii) vision and logic, (iii) collaborative dialogue, and (iv) collective experimentation to discover. In this sense, Bushe (2011) claimed that the AI approach not only focuses on the best of what is, but it may engage all stakeholders in a processes of re-imagining what could be and taking ownership for what will be. The “fusion of strengths” and “activation of energy” is generally considered essential to the generative momentum of the change process (Cooperrider, 2014). Therefore, through the implementation of AI approach in this study, it is believed that it is able to create integration and coordination on various parties such as government agencies at state and federal levels, private agencies, tour operators and the local residents, in which the key element is “questions about things positive create a more positive
31
environment”. Although there were studies that discussed about the AI approach, limited attempts were made to investigate the development of rural tourism, particularly in Malaysia’s perspective. Thus, it is necessary to do deep research in this field and it is also important to ensure that all parties have the same vision and mission in developing the tourism industry especially at SSAF.
1.8.2 The Application of the Social Exchange Theory (SET)
The Social Exchange Theory (hereafter SET) was adapted widely by tourism researchers since the 1970s, particularly in a study of rural residents’ perceptions of tourism development as well as rural residents support related to the perceived positive or negative impacts of tourism. Although SET has been widely used and accepted as a framework in this field, particularly in explaining residents’ reaction to tourism development, however, it still allows for the capturing of differing views based on experiential and psychological outcomes (Nunkoo, 2015). Thus, the theoretical contribution of this study using SET is two-fold. Firstly, the study addresses tourism issues by integrating the AI approach to explore the significance of rural tourism development at SSAF. Based on an extensive review, there are very limited studies that integrated both the SET and AI approach in their study, particularly in tourism field. SET was applied as a guideline to assess the understanding of residents’ views and perceptions of tourism stakeholders because they are essential for the success and sustainability of tourism development. Indeed, the stimulating effect of this support is also of great importance for tourism stakeholders and this has been a subject for on-going research in tourism field. It is
32
believed that, the findings of this study demonstrate the validity of a model of stakeholders’ support by including the domains of perceived impacts (economic, social and environment) of tourism at SSAF. Even so, the integration of these elements will provide a more nuanced understanding of stakeholders’ views and perceptions. Secondly, the findings stress the future contributions and the significance of tourism development not only in relation to the single stakeholder, as commonly done in tourism literature, but by encompassing the whole cycle of tourism stakeholders using the elements of SET. Limited research has been conducted comparing multiple stakeholders groups in a community (Byrd, Bosley & Dronberger, 2009). With that, the findings also provide a more in-depth understanding of how stakeholders evaluate the “exchange” that involved in tourism development and how this evaluation is shape and intertwined by their abilities to take advantage and level of dependence for future tourism development. Further discussions on SET will be highlighted in the next chapter (section 2.5) of this study.
1.9
Operational Definitions of Concepts
Several concepts and terms should be defined and discussed to orientate the reader and to provide a foundation for the study. These concepts include rural tourism, community tourism, sustainable tourism, appreciative inquiry, and stakeholder. Rural Tourism: The term rural tourism is used when rural culture is a key component of the product on offer. The distinguishing feature of tourism products in rural tourism is the wish to give visitors a personalized contact, a taste of the physical and human
33
environment of the countryside and, as far as possible, allow them to participate in the activities, traditions and lifestyles of local people (UNWTO, 2014) Community tourism: This term is used to describe an approach to tourism in which the needs and views of local residents are incorporated in the planning and development process (Medlik, 2003) Sustainable Tourism (ST): Thought of as a goal or vision; as a process of achieving or moving towards that vision; and as the policies, plans and activities of those organizations, whether private, public or third sector, that are involved in sustainable tourism development” (Sharpley, 2009) Appreciative Inquiry (AI): AI is a philosophy that incorporates an approach, a process (4-D Cycle of Discovery, Dream, Design, and Destiny) for engaging people at any and all levels to produce effective and positive change. It has been used as an adaptable change method in combination with other organizational processes and currently has been used throughout the world either in small-and large-scale change initiatives (Cooperrider, Whitney & Stavros, 2008) Stakeholder: “Any group or individual who can affect or is affected by tourism development in an area” (Feeeman 1984, p 46)
1.10
Chapter Summary
Overall, this chapter provides an account of and the reasons for the widespread significance of the background of the study that was conducted at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest in Kulim, Kedah, one of the best eco-tourism destinations in Malaysia. 34
The chapter was divided into a few parts: introduction and overview of the study’s purpose, the provision of research setting, statement of the problem, research objectives, research questions, justification, and significance of study, scope, and limitation of study as well as the operational definitions of concepts. An implication of this is the possibility that the study will assist in alleviating poverty among local indigenes, offer ways to overcome new economic, social, and environmental challenges and create a better understanding of the potential of rural tourism in the Sedim area. Overall, the findings of this study are intended to serve as a baseline for future studies, as well as to avoid the failures in the process of tourism planning and development particularly in remote areas. The next chapter discusses the current provision of rural tourism development for the past few decades, which served to motivate this study. The first section of the next chapter will address the provision of rural tourism, followed by the issues related to rural tourism development for the study. The next section, however, will further discuss on the significance of sustainable development in the tourism field in general and rural tourism in particular. The Appreciative Inquiry approach also will be deeply discussed in the next section followed by the concept of SET that was applied in this study.
35
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1
Introduction
The previous chapter extensively describes and reviews the details of the issues and challenges in the development of rural tourism, particularly in Sedim and Kedah in general. As the focus of this study is to determine the prospects and future of rural tourism development at SSAF from various stakeholders, the following sections establish the theoretical and research backdrop within which this study was conducted. An extensive discussion shows the importance of rural tourism development, current issues related to sustainable development as well as how none of the plethora of studies available to us has to do with the peculiarity of SSAF. The first section in this chapter presents the subject of the study, which is the provision of rural tourism and its benefits to tourism stakeholders. The section is sub-divided into two elements: definitions and concepts of rural tourism. Subsequently, the study focuses on the benefits, issues, challenges, and significant elements of sustainable development in rural tourism development. This section, therefore, attempts to show that sustainable tourism plays an important role in determining the success of any tourism development at the community level. The next section focuses on the application of the Appreciative Inquiry approach whereas the theoretical and conceptual framework is discussed in the last section.
36
2.1.1 Development in Tourism Industry
Tourism has traditionally been considered an effective instrument for social and economic development (Sola, Moraleda & Mazon, 2012). It is not made up of large corporations, but rather is comprised of thousands of smaller privately owned and operated businesses. The tourist industry relies on its customers, the tourists, to actively search out products and services that give them pleasure and enjoyment. According to Sola et.al (2012), tourism industry influences consumers through its three principal components, which are; products and services (suppliers), the methods of travel (transporters) and those who provide the structure through planning and policy development (regulators). The supply side consists of those businesses and organizations that provide the myriad of products and services consumed or used by travellers. These include such things as commercial accommodations, restaurants, attractions, festivals and events, museums, recreational facilities, sightseeing tours, specialty and souvenir shops, equipment and apparatus and so on. The basic goals and objectives of the suppliers are aimed at pleasing the tourists and keep them coming back for more. The travel side of the industry includes various modes of transportation, which are used to get to and from destinations. These include ships, motor coaches, planes, trains and automobiles – but they are now also including such means of travel as bicycle, motorcycle, mobile home, and snowmobile and even dog-sledding. In addition, it includes companies that provide travel packages including travel agencies, tour operators, destination management organizations, and tour consultants. In the case of tourism also, the inputs, products, methods of production and chains of supply are 37
much less clear (Sharpley, 2009). Firstly, there is no single, definable tourism ‘product’. Tourists consume experiences, the natures of which are as much dependent on the activities of tourists themselves as they are on the supply of specific tourism products and services. Secondly, tourist services are supplied by an enormous variety of businesses and organizations, many of which, such as airlines or accommodation, are industries in their own right. Thirdly, although some businesses, such as tour operating or travel retailing, are quite evidently directly involved in tourism, the relationship between tourism and other businesses or organizations is less clear. For example, financial institutions provide foreign currency services and insurance companies provide travel insurance, yet neither could be described as tourism businesses. In short, numerous businesses operate in industries that are only partly or indirectly linked to tourism.
2.2
The Provision of Rural Tourism Development
Rural tourism has been popular among the public and has been recognised as a vital division of tourism industry in the world. This industry also considered as an important and effective means to fulfil the task, balance the economic and social development between urban and rural areas and finally narrow the gap (WTO, 2001). Rural tourism means prosperity and modernization in addition to financial support particularly for those in under-developed regions (Falak, Chiun & Wee, 2014). More importantly, rural tourism contributes to poverty alleviation and has been generating large-scale employment opportunities for the rural populations (Hall, Kirkpatrick & Mitchell, 2005). So far, however, there has been little discussion about the contribution tourism at the rural community level. As claimed by Koster & Lemelin (2009, p.258), two gaps 38
were identified: how to make rural tourism a viable industry in resource-dependent communities and how to embed the industry within a community seeking economic alternatives from a context of crisis. In relation to those matters, the purpose and significance of developing rural tourism has been undergoing significant changes due to rural tourism, which has assumed a major force in rural economic development. Awareness about the environment and intensive training for income-generating activities, particularly in remote areas, comprises capacity building of the communities (Jurowski, 2009). Ideally, tourism in remote areas is developed using the inherent characteristics and resources of the locality. These typically include “their attractive natural environment, original local culture and traditional systems of land use and farming” (Bramwell & Lane, 2012). However, constrained by remoteness and underdevelopment, rural areas have limited options for economic development. This was supported with the assertion by Liu that in order to stimulate rural economies, it has become inevitable for rural regions to seek alternative uses for local resources (Liu, 2006). The previous study by Koster (2008) was critically assessed to determine the potential for tourism within rural areas, demonstrating that little research has been conducted to ascertain how or why tourism is chosen as an economic development strategy. Thus, they suggested the use of rural-based tourism as one possible Community Economic Development (CED) strategy within rural communities. The development of tourism in rural communities requires high value on the sustainability and the awareness of the economic development and fragile environment (Diao, 2012; Johnson, 2010). Therefore, it is important to resolve these issues by analysing the literature of rural
39
tourism development and the significance of sustainable development within the tourism industry as they point towards the need for SSAF but stop short of a SSAF assessment.
2.2.1 Definition of Rural Tourism
What does rural tourism mean? For many in the industry, the word rural is a common ‘house-ware’, particularly for those who are involved in the development of society. However, in the tourism industry, rural tourism considerably varies from country to country. The term occurs in advanced industrial societies. It was born in the mid-1950s when the European economic reconstruction process was finished after the Second World War (Lane, 1994). The term of rural tourism has been a subject of discussion either in a policy context or in industry and academic literature. Nevertheless, such definitions do little to convey the true meaning of tourism in rural areas because of the difficulty of establishing what is ‘rural’. In broader definition, Bramwell & Lane (2012) and Lane (1994) discussed and established the purest form of rural tourism, which includes a few elements (see Figure 2.1).
Figure 2.1: Definition of rural tourism Source: Bramwell & Lane (2012) and Lane (1994) 40
Prior to discussion of definitions of rural tourism, there are key issues that need to be considered in defining the term of rural tourism. In much of the recent literature on the tourism industry, efforts have been made to define the term of rural tourism itself. The literatures related to rural tourism areas are heterogeneous and the definition of a rural areas is thus problematic and the different terminologies are used according to aims or types of activities in rural areas such as adventure, eco-tourism and green tourism (Holland, Burian, Dixey & Goodwin, 2003). Arriving at a definition of rural tourism is more often a function of what aspects of rural tourism are concerned with, rather than what elements creates the rural tourist experience. This is supported by UNWTO that highlighted;
The term rural tourism is used when rural culture is a key component of the product on offer. The distinguishing feature of tourism products in rural tourism is the wish to give visitors a personalized contact, a taste of the physical and human environment of the countryside and as far as possible, allow them to participate in the activities, traditions and lifestyles of local people” (UNWTO, 2014) In particular, Knowd (2001) also highlighted that rural tourism is located in agricultural landscapes and is characterized by enjoyment of a tamed-nature or highly modified landscape. There is a focus on the land, how it is used, and how interaction between humans and the land created the locale. An analysis of the definitions also revealed that rural tourism may encompasses the multiples dimensions and complexities of natural and man-made attractions (Nair et al., 2014), exploiting natural resources, cultural and historical values and traditions (Bel, Lacroix, Lyser, Rambonilaza & Turpin, 2015) as well as the agricultural products and product brands with regional identity (Ciolac et al., 2011). 41
Rural tourism also includes all of the aspects of tourism (e.g. farm tourism, green tourism, outdoors, agro-tourism and eco-tourism or nature) with physical, social and historical dimensions (Dong, Wang, Morais & Brooks, 2013). Indeed, researchers also stated that the term of “rural tourism” should be better described as “tourism in rural areas” in order to avoid semantic confusion in this field. In particular, previous studies also argued that there is no consensus on the definitions of rural tourism, and it is often confused with other concepts because rural tourism is a versatile and diversified industry that relates to the natural environment and outdoor activities (Leco, Hernandez & Campon, 2013). On the other hand, visitors’ perception and image of “rurality” should be an important consideration in any definition of rural tourism (Chambers, 2005. p. 181). Regardless of various definitions and points of view, more importantly, rural tourism in a particular, more complex form of tourism comprises both the actual tourist activities as well as the economy itself. The complexity of the pictures of rural tourism can be viewed in Figure 2.2 system definitions, which combine whole aspects of rural tourism (Konyves, 2001 in Pakurar & Olah, 2008).
42
Figure 2.2: System definitions of rural tourism Source: Pakurar & Olah (2008) In general, rural tourism is a more complex form of tourism, comprising both the actual tourist activities as well as the economy itself (WTO, 2002b) and any definition of rural tourism requires recognizing the essential qualities of what is ‘rural’ itself. However, the definition of rural tourism from a Malaysian perspective has been acknowledged in the Malaysia Rural Tourism Master Plan as follows: Rural tourism is defined as tourism that provides opportunities to visitors to visit rural villages and rural attractions, and to experience the culture and heritage of Malaysia, thereby providing socio-economic benefits for local communities. Day-visits are included in the definition. Rural tourism in Malaysia encompasses tourism within the core rural area that is in the rural space between urban areas and hinterland. It may include fishing villages and other villages located outside the core area, where the traditional lifestyle is still preserved. The proximity of many of these rural areas to the hinterland of jungle and rainforest also offers visitors an opportunity to extend their holiday and enjoy these unique natural resources (WTO, 2001, p. 22) 43
However, due to consensus on the definition of rural tourism in literature studies, the recent study by Nair et al. (2014) managed to propose and develop a new definition of rural tourism that encompasses multiple dimensions and complexities. They believed that there is a need to enhance the definition of rural tourism, particularly in Malaysian’s context, and the finding can be used to guide the Malaysian Government in re-positioning rural tourism as a key niche industry. Thus, the following statement describing the definition of rural tourism, which was redefined comprehensively: “Rural tourism is functionally rural and provides the opportunity for tourists to directly involve, experience, enjoy and learn the unique cultural, natural and historical attractions and activities provided by the local communities in rural areas, with cooperation from the government and business in order to provide socio-economic benefits without exploiting the environment”(p.21) There are also many definitions that were put forth by academicians as well as scholars relating to eco-tourism, cultural tourism and agro-tourism (Ezung, 2012). In that respect, it is believed that the definition of this term is still heterogeneous, as rural tourism is generally regarded as including a wide range of elements, products and services provided as well as locations. For instance, the elements of accommodation, activities related to the nature, and traditional and cultural conservation are amongst the tourism products that have been developed in an area characterized as being rural. Based on extensive literature, it is found that the definition of rural tourism that can be adopted in this study refers to “any elements that related are to nature, agro-products, cultural and historical as well as accommodation, which may bring wider benefits to local stakeholders”.
44
2.2.2 Concept of Rural Tourism
Rural tourism is considered as an economically significant sector of the country’s economy and holds great potential in terms of sustainable rural development. It allows rural peoples to share in promoting more balanced benefits of tourism development as well as for sustainable forms of development (Ciolac et al., 2011). In fact, it may offer differentiated products to tourists, blend them together with nature, and enable appreciation of the culture of the particular destination. This is the main focus of rural tourism because rural areas are rich in natural, cultural, and traditional elements (Bhujbal & Joshi, 2012). However, none of the studies make a distinction between tourism in rural areas of developing countries and those of developed countries, when discussing about the concept of rural tourism (Knowd, 2001). This will be further discussed to highlight the adequacies of previous literature in defining the concept of rural tourism. Generally, rural tourism has been acknowledged as a tool to promote the preservation of various products that are nature-based and enriched by the community and local environment. However, such definitions of rural tourism do little to convey the true concepts of rural tourism, especially at SSAF. For the purpose of this study, key features that make rural tourism relevant to SSAF development are their poverty and lack of economic opportunities, combined with the natural resources, scenery and culture of the area that provide tourism assets. Therefore, the true concepts may vary according to the studies and any concept of rural tourism needs to recognize the essential qualities of what is ‘rural’.
45
A number of empirical studies have been conducted in which researchers discuss the essential aspects of rural tourism. The nature of rural tourism products often involves small-scale operations and culturally-based or farm-based products, which are conducive to wide participation amongst tourists (Pakurar & Olah, 2008). In particular, Irshad (2010)’s review of Page and Getz (1997) shows that rural tourism is not just a farm or agro-based tourism, because it also comprises special interest in nature holidays and eco-tourism, educational travel, walking, climbing and riding holidays, sport and health tourism, adventure and heritage tourism where production is based on establishing new places for tourism. This is supported by previous research, which states that rural tourism should involve any activities that causes the rural community to directly engage in tourism either by them having in full control or having their culture serve as the attraction (Holland et al., 2003). Studies on the rural tourism concept in previous studies were more concentrated on natural areas or wilderness areas. This is because rural tourism is unique as it plays a role in integrating the rural experience based on the interaction of rural activities, manmade facilities as well as rural accommodation (Pierret, 2012). It is essential to have a better understanding regarding of these concepts and the important elements that are included in this area. A report by UNWTO highlights a clear concept of rural tourism, as shown in Figure 2.3, which consists of both segments: active and passive concepts of rural tourism, environment, and educational experience.
46
Figure 2.3: The Concept of rural tourism Source: Pierret (2012) Tourism in rural areas plays an important role that positively influences regional development or vice-versa. The aim of rural tourism everywhere across the world is not just to increase the net benefits to rural people from the tourism industry but to enhance the participation of local people in managing the tourism product (Zhu, 2009). One major issue is that if more tourism can be developed and well preserved, the poverty impact amongst local people in rural areas can be reduced. The notion of rural tourism all over the world has meant different things for different people. It is a normative term and therefore, different forms of the concepts and the definition of rural tourism has assumed a complexity of the activity (Sharpley & Roberts, 2004). What is important is the diversity of approaches used by many researchers that emphasize the concept of an urban-rural continuum as a means of establishing differing degrees of “rurality” and the essential characteristics of “ruralness” (UNWTO, 2011). Conversely, Bhujbal & Joshi (2012), stated that a few elements are
47
considered in the different forms of rural tourism, such as eco-tourism, nature tourism, agro-tourism and adventure tourism (see Figure 2.4).
Figure 2.4: Different forms of rural tourism Source: Bhujbal & Joshi (2012) Numerous studies have attempted to explain a broader perspective of rural tourism, such as the established concept by WTO (2001) in the Rural Tourism Master Plan for Malaysia, which identified various components of Malaysian “ruralness” in tourism objectives. It is included agro-tourism, heritage tourism, ecotourism, as well as culturebased and home-stay products. Based on various forms of rural tourism in the literature, it is important to note the concept of rural tourism from a Malaysian perspective. The major difference in the concept of rural tourism in previous studies is the “home-stay” products. Staying together with host families, or namely “adopted” families, became major component in the Malaysian home-stay (Razzaq, Hadi & Mustafa, 2011). It is believed that there is no other country that offers this type of rural-based activity, i.e. allowing tourists to stay and directly experience the cultural and traditional 48
elements in Malaysia. The growth of this form of tourism is partly due to moves by the government to adopt alternative development practices that promise more sustainable and equitable use of resources (Ateijevic & Page, 2009). This mostly involves small-scale, locally-owned and operated tourism enterprises with the participation of local people, which matches the characteristics of a rural tourism enterprise (Razzaq et al., 2011).
2.2.3 The Strengths and Contributions of Rural Tourism Development
Over the past decade, rural tourism has become an indispensable part in some countries like Malaysia. In fact, governments also see tourism as offering new employment opportunities in a growing sector that is focused on service industries and may assist in developing and modernizing the economy (Egbali, Nosrat & Ali, 2011). This industry also is important for many reasons such as enhancing the rural collective economy, beautifying the rural landscape, reducing the urban-rural gap, building a harmonious society, and exploring a new method of rural tourism development (Zhang, 2012). In addition, Bramwell & Lane (2012) claimed that rural tourism is associated with quality of life issues as it offers people the opportunity to take a break away from the complexities and stresses of everyday life and work. In the new global industry, the only way to encourage rural development is to encourage rural tourism because the development of rural tourism has significantly contributed to the preservation of local cultural heritage and to the nature of the environment (Affairs, By & Buck, 2010; Razzaq et al., 2013). If the development of tourism is not properly planned and managed, it may leave permanent footprints on
49
the physical, social, cultural, and economic environment. The main reason visitors choose rural destinations is due to a desire to enjoy the quality of rural life beyond the human landscape. Thus, maintaining environmental quality is an essential condition for an area to be considered attractive (Tureac, Turtureanu & Bordean, 2008; Turtureanu, 2006). Appropriate locations for tourism activities are best when the recreational attributes are primarily expressed by their very atmosphere, as villages are characterized by preserved nature and large green areas (Mensah & Benedict, 2010; Sharpley & Roberts, 2004). Changes to rural areas have been inextricably linked to the development of both global and local economies. Thus, it is believed that study on the potential of developing rural tourism, particularly in a rural setting, may contribute to the sustainability of the environment as well creation of alternative income for rural dwellers because many countries engage the rural tourism industry as a “richly paradoxical” industry and experience rapid changes, particularly in socio-economic transformations (Knowd, 2001). Rural tourism in particular, may cover the customers’ needs concerning hospitality, food and beverage, lodging, leisure activities, and events besides the preservation of the environment. Promoting rural tourism in undeveloped areas where the natural environment predominates, aims at sustainable local development, ensuring social and economic benefits to the local community in order to maintain rural assets (Devisme & Bargeau, 2009). Despite these, promoting rural tourism is grounded on a look for authentic experience, which may allow the interaction between the territory and its
50
inhabitants. This is especially so as this study aims to link the SSAF territory with its people for economic emancipation in Malaysia. Currently, Malaysia is known as one of the best eco-tourism destinations in the region, and the diverse segments in the tourism industry, such as medical, health, education, cultural/heritage, rural, and ecological tourism have grown at a rate of 30 per cent per year (Ling, Abidin, Nair, Ramachandran & Shuib, 2011). A study by WTTC shows that the tourism industry in Malaysia has directly generated more than 800,000 jobs in 2013 (6.7 per cent of total employment) and is forecasted to grow to more than 900,000 jobs or 5.1 per cent increment (6.9 per cent of total employment). By 2024, tourism will directly account for more than 1.2 million jobs, an increase of 3.1 per cent over the next ten years (WTTC, 2014a). A number of reports have also indicated that the rural tourism industry in Malaysia is growing at a phenomenal rate and is expected to be a major contributor to the nation’s tourism receipts (e.g. Department of Statistics, 2012 & Department of Statistics, 2013). Indeed, a recent report by the Department of Statistic Malaysia showed that there were an increasing number of tourist arrivals in both rural and urban areas, which has influenced various parties to get involved in the development of rural tourism. The growth of tourist demand is more significant because the number of domestic tourists visiting urban and rural areas has increased from 193.3 million in 2013 to recorded 217.5 million in 2014 (see Figure 2.5). The report indicated the positive impact on the growth of rural tourism industry in Malaysia with an increase about 12.4 per cent and 15.5 per cent, respectively (Department of Statistics, 2015).
51
Figure 2.5: Number of domestic tourists by strata, 2013 and 2014 Source: Department of Statistics (2015) In addition, according to the report, the total expenditure of domestic tourists for both strata also increased from RM47.8 billion in 2013 to RM55.5 billion in 2014. The average expenditure of domestic visitors showed an increase between the strata, which is RM274 per trip by urban tourists and RM185 per trip by rural tourists in 2013. In contrast, urban tourists spent about RM286 pert trip and rural tourists spent about RM182 per trip, both in 2014 (see Figure 2.6). Based on this report, it shows that rural tourism development will provide the platform and create greater potentials to increase the contribution towards the country’s economy.
Figure 2.6: Total expenditure of domestic tourists by strata, 2013 and 2014 Source: Department of Statistics (2015)
52
The recent scenario in the tourism industry shows that this industry has emerged as one of the central means by which rural areas can adjust to the new global environment. Indeed, rural tourism increasingly attracts the attention of potential tourists because they see compensation for what they have lost in urban areas (Sharpley & Roberts, 2004). This may serve as a tool to finance protection of natural resources and increase the economic impacts for the country (Sharpley & Jepson, 2011). More importantly, the potential of rural tourism may bring benefits to environmental protection and conservation through increasing awareness of environmental values in local communities. Similarly, Hall, Kirkpatrick and Mitchell (2005) claimed that limited awareness of tourism can contribute to false expectations about the benefits of tourism. One of the most significant current discussions in rural studies is the goal of promoting rural tourism to increase net benefits to rural people by increasing their participation in managing tourism products. If more tourism can be developed in rural areas, particularly in ways that involve high local participation in decisions and enterprises, then poverty impacts are likely to be enhanced (Zhang, 2012). The implementation of tourism development and rural tourism may vary between different states in terms of its focus and speed of the implementation. There have been suggestions to use an integrated approach in tourism planning and development to preserve existing natural and cultural assets (Siti-Nabiha, Wahid, Amran, Haat & Abustan, 2009). Initially, rural tourism can utilise tourism resources to optimize rural industrial structures, develop rural tourism services, promote employment and create a better economic base for the new rural construction (Zhang, Cai & Harrill, 2009). When a rural community considers tourism a development tool, attention should be given to
53
planning, developing, investigating, and promoting opportunities for sustainable tourism development (Kim, Uysal & Sirgy, 2013).
2.2.4 The Potentials and Opportunities of Rural Tourism Development
An ever-increasing number of destinations worldwide have opened up to and invested in tourism, turning tourism into a key driver of socio-economic progress through export revenues, the creation of jobs and enterprises, as well as instigating infrastructure development (WTTC, 2013). Because of this, over the past six decades, tourism experienced continued expansion and diversification, becoming one of the largest and fastest-growing economic sectors in the world. Many new destinations have emerged in addition to the traditional favourites of rural destinations. A recent study by WTTC shows that the numbers of international tourist arrivals worldwide are expected to increase by 3.3 per cent a year from 2010 to reach 1.8 billion by 2030. Meanwhile, between 2010 and 2030, arrivals in emerging destinations are expected to increase at twice the rate of those in advanced economies. In that respect, the tourism industry would significantly boost national economic and social benefits while mitigating its environmental impacts, which additionally can help position the country at the top place in the world (WTTC, 2014b). In recent decades, rural tourism became not only a remarkable complementary income resource, mainly for the rural population, but also an important mechanism for a new balance and a dynamic relation between urban centres and inland locales (Bramwell & Lane, 2008). This dynamic relation will allow the expansion of financial and social tourist activity in time and space (Sharpley & Jepson, 2011a). As discussed before,
54
rural tourism is related with small-scale tourist activities, of family or co-operative type organisation, which are developed in the rural regions by people who are occupied in agriculture. Its basic aim is to provide subsistence-based farmers with alternative solutions for their occupations and also to improve their income and their life quality (McGehee, 2004). The opportunities offered by the tourism industry globally are unquestionable, and every country seeks to stimulate sustainable economic growth based on employment opportunities (Patzelt & Shepherd, 2011). There have been several studies in the literature reporting the role of the tourism industry as a generator of jobs and revenues; therefore, it has been identified as a strategic domain and able to integrate a wider regional branding strategy as it is able to highlight the tourism potential to strengthen the position of the region and the country. However, how to operationalize it remains uncertain, which opens doors for future research (Oliveira, 2014). In addition, previous studies suggested the opportunity to provide unique experiences, managers must first identify and highlight the most significant aspects of the destination’s culture, history, and local way of life that sets it apart from the rest of the tourism world (Kim, 2014). Apart from that, they also should creatively develop cultural activities that can stimulate visitors’ senses, which would invoke entertaining and educational experiences. This is to ensure that rural activities may create and deliver meaningful tourism experiences, create a sense of security to the tourist (Ezung, 2012), which results in new local income, increases revenues as well as stimuli for other sectors of the local economy (Carmichael & Ainley, 2014). Other than that, one of the most significant current discussions about the potential of tourism development is the
55
importance of innovation and technology in service sectors or even in the manufacturing sector (Cosma, Paun, Bota & Fleseriu, 2014). Cosma et al. (2014) claimed that the issue of innovation in tourism increased in the last few years and it is important to highlight the awareness of innovation for business in the rural tourism industry. The innovation of tourism products as a means to introduce and bring into the market a new or a significantly improved product. Recent developments in rural industry also have heightened the need for destination image as rural destinations are becoming increasingly popular among urban dwellers and the online marketing and promotion of rural destinations is in urgent need of development (Zhou, 2014). The development of rural tourism also may facilitate rediscovering the value of rural resources that have previously been disregarded in the modernization process of the world economy (Hwang & Lee, 2015). They believed that this development might provide insights to both farmers and policymakers to adopt a wider perspective than to only focus on agricultural products. Several studies revealed that rural development encompasses such holistic rural activities as agricultural production, lifestyle, and rural amenities to attract people from both urban and rural areas (Egbali, Bakhshandea, Khalil & Ali, 2010; Frederick, 1993; Lane, 2005). Indeed, local communities in rural areas are provided with the chance to develop and preserve the folklore or to revive forgotten arts and practices, as well as to produce traditional products (e.g. textiles, traditional desserts, etc.). In addition, they can revive local customs and organize traditional feasts as well as preserve people’s memory of cultural traditions—particularly among the younger generation otherwise mesmerised by Internet based technologies and mobile devises.
56
All these maintain and do not alienate the character of the countryside, but they highlight the variety and the uniqueness of each place (Park & Boo, 2010). Furthermore, the connection between remote regions and urban centres is ensured, and the most important point is that new perspectives are open for the young people of the region. Rural tourism in particular comprises both the actual tourist activities as well as boosting the economy itself. The complexity of the pictures of rural tourism can be clearly discussed as a tourism product, which emphasizes the importance of supply management and marketing activities. Besides, it is built to introduce rural regions and to utilise other attractions and provide diversified services (Carmichael & Ainley, 2014). A large volume of studies have found and confirmed the potentials of rural tourism, which have significant impacts towards tourism stakeholders and contributes to the reformation of the countryside. This can be shown in Table 2.1 as follows: Table 2.1: Potentials of rural tourism development No
Potentials of rural tourism
Authors
1
Promotes agricultural income directly as an Lane, 1994 additional resource of income for local communities who are complimentarily occupied with rural tourism
2
Assists residents of a region to remain in their native Sharpley & Roberts, village, so as to prevent rural depopulation and 2004b; Xinmei Zhang confront urbanism et al., 2009
3
Provides alternative and complementary occupation solutions to those parts of the population who either cannot live by agricultural exploitation alone or they live in urban centres and are willing to be relocated
57
Darau, Corneliu, Brad & Avram, 2010; Gil Arroyo, Barbieri & Rozier Rich, 2013
to the countryside in the quest of a different quality of life 4
Potential for preservation of traditional forms of Lapan & Barbieri, rural occupation, which are restricted by the 2014 globalization of the markets
5
Functions as a mechanism of direct selling, Bitsani & Kavoura, promotion and advertising of rural products and 2014 services; especially authentic local products, which are characterised by quality, hygiene, and trade names Contributes to the revival of traditional settlements Richard, Chandrarathne & Chandana, 2013; Zhou, 2014
6
7
Supports the protection and the promotion of the Egbali, Nosrat & Ali, natural richness of the countryside (natural beauty, 2011; Nair et al., remarkable natural ecosystems, natural and rural 2014; WTO, 2002a biodiversity)
8
Enriches the basic national tourist product of each Tang & Jones, 2012; country with complementary qualities, which make Koster, 2008 it different and more attractive and competitive in the international tourist market
9
Potential for promotion, exploitation and protection of the cultural heritage and funds in the countryside as tourist resources, and also the humanising of the relations between the visitors and the residents of the countryside and the environment
10
Incorporates the countryside in a more balanced Garrod, Wornell & tourist income breakdown Youell, 2006; Roberts & Hall, 2004
58
Anderson, Bakir & Wickens, 2015; Briedenhann, 2008; Xinmei Zhang et al., 2009
Rural tourism development in general is complex, considering the wide variety of companies, agents, and resources to be jointly managed. It is seen as a valuable and growing sector of the overall tourism market, representing a significant source of income to rural communities (Sprangel, Stavros & Cole, 2011). The development of rural tourism also offers potential solutions to many of the problems facing rural areas (Keyim, Yang & Zhang, 2005). Indeed, rural tourism can assist and ameliorate economic, social and identity restructuring processes through its ability to raise income, stabilize populations, sustain cultures, redistribute economic roles besides promoting a positive and ecological friendly image (Pakurar & Olah, 2008). However, if the concept of rural or eco-tourism is seen as the creation of leisure opportunities rather than as a part of diversification strategies for rural economy, it might affect tourism benefits for the local community (Liu, 2006). Based on the Malaysian perspective, the tourism industry have performed above expectations in 2013, with tourist receipts of RM65.44 billion, exceeding the initial target of RM65 billion, while the tourist arrivals grew by 2.7 per cent to 25.7 million arrivals compared to 25 million arrivals in 2012 (Aziz, 2014). The results show that the implementations of NKEA’s programme, as well as the MTTP’s plan, were successful and the substantial growth in tourist receipts also increased yield per tourist in Malaysia. The potential of the tourism industry in Malaysia as a duty-free and affordable luxury-shopping destination should be encouraged and expanded through strategic public-private partnership (WTTC, 2014). Malaysia is also rich in biodiversity but has yet to fully leverage the potential of ecotourism. Thus, the development of Malaysia Mega Biodiversity Hub (MMBH) Interim
59
Board, comprising private, public sector, and Non-Government Organization (NGO’s) representatives in December 2010 was to provide policy direction and decisions to improve the standards of excellence in the management and preservation of key ecotourism sites. Its purpose was also to identify and monitor eco-sites and ensure the sustainability of ecotourism development. Despite this, to become a leading ecotourism destination, a comprehensive system is still required to monitor and conserve the presentation of the country’s natural attractions (PEMANDU, 2013. p. 126). From the extensive reviews, it is found that an important objective for tourism planners is to diversify the tourism product (e.g. the development of culture, adventure tourism) with the aim to encourage visitors to stay longer and ideally spend more and/or develop a more distinguishable destination identity. These ‘new’ features of the rural product can provide the basis for a revised marketing programme. There may be a lot of good reasons to encourage concentrations of tourism activity in rural areas, such as to limit negative impacts spreading more widely, to take advantage of economies of scale, or to optimise different land uses (Pena, Jamilena & Molina, 2012). However, effective rural development strategies must be concerned with local wealth—broadly defined to include natural, physical, and financial capital as well as other less tangible forms of wealth such as human and social capital. Thus, understanding how wealth can be created and sustained in rural areas requires a conceptual framework that reflects the diverse contexts and many factors influencing the process and its outcomes (Pender, Weber & Brown, 2014).
60
2.2.5 Impact of Rural Tourism Development
Tourism impact is one of the most popular issues in tourism studies. Rural tourism usually has no significant difference regarding its impact as compared to the tourism in general, even though its development definitely has lower observable impact than mass tourism. In recent years, there has been an increasing amount of literature on impact of tourism development either positive or negative to the local communities as well as to the environment. Even the acceptance among the residents and tourists both domestic and international may be varied, tourism industry is recently declared as one of the largest and dynamically developing industry and has undergone some significant changes over the past decades (Mohammadi et al., 2010). This can be shown in the recent statistics by WTTC where the total contribution of tourism industry provides about RM158.2 billion (16 per cent of GDP) in 2013 and is forecast to rise by 6.8 per cent in 2014 to RM262.5 billion (17.3 per cent of GDP) in 2024 (WTTC, 2014a). The continuing evaluation of the tourism industry has kept it as a significant player in the economic, social and environment landscape of the country. The growth and development rate in tourism with the introduction of new management and educational experience actively affects various sectors, which contributes to the social and economic development of the country as a whole, and particularly so with the local communities (García-Rosell & Mäkinen, 2012). Since tourism becomes one of the major economic contributors in a country, residents perceive economic benefits as the most important impacts brought about by tourism development. Though they recognize the negative impacts of tourism on the physical environment, they tend to neglect the potential risk of further expansion (Puczkó & Rátz, 2000). 61
The worldwide growth of tourism has generated a considerable interest in research, which focuses on the impact of tourism in different environments and scales. A range of themes and issues have most notably emerged on the impact of tourism, namely, social, economic and environment impacts (Byrd et al., 2009; Mohammad et al., 2010; Ray et al., 2012). There are two basic ways for a community or a business to increase revenues from tourism: (i) increase the number of visitors and (ii) increase the amount that each visitor spends. This is why local chambers of commerce have devoted so much of their resources to attracting more visitors to the area (Ardahaey, 2011). This dual nature of tourism requires urgent integration of preventative approaches in all tourism strategies, development plans and action at all levels of governance and organization in order to avoid the risk of “too much tourism killing tourism” (Kim et al., 2013; Mensah, 2012). Despite this, studies have claimed that the benefits of tourism for local residents are highly limited whereas at the same time the significant and negative impacts includes substantial environment damage, cultural erosion and community conflict (Budeanu, 2005). Although the use of tourism as a development tool may be the best option, they suggest that critical evaluations of tourism are needed in assessing the negative impact of tourism at the local levels. In certain circumstances, tourism activities have not been seen as a panacea for rural community growth as the development of local tourism industry often fails to deliver significant economic, social, cultural and environmental benefits (Strickland-Munro, Allison, & Moore, 2010). Besides, rural tourism is not able to integrate well into the rural development strategies to contribute to the betterment of the rural communities (Bennett, Lemelin, Koster & Budke, 2012). Inappropriate types and scales of development may arise due to laissez-faire tourism 62
policies and lack of national, regional or local planning and regulation (Dwyer & Edwards, 2010). In addition, like other forms of development, the tourism industry also has attendant challenges, such as social dislocation, economic dependence, loss of cultural heritage and problems with ecological degradation (Dwyer & Edwards, 2010). In another study, they suggested the use of systems thinking in planning and included uncertainty in managing protected area tourism. This is because they believed its value in aligning the aims of sustainability and fostering system resilience to with-stand disturbance and cope with uncertainty (Moscardo, 2008; Walker, 2008). In particular, Pearce (2008) notes that residents in rural and peripheral regions typically have very limited experience of being tourists themselves. They lack knowledge of potential demands, impact, and changes that are associated with tourism development. Learning about the impact of tourism has led many people to seek more responsible holidays. There are also studies that point to significant impact on the aspects of the environment, socialization, and economy. These include various forms of alternative or sustainable tourism, such as nature-based tourism, ecotourism, and cultural tourism (Byrd et al., 2009; Nurul, Mazumder, Ahmed & Raquib, 2011). In an attempt to curb negative impact, tourism development and promotion needs to be guided by the core values and principles of development. These core values and principles include: responsible tourism, community-driven tourism, integrated and sustainable tourism, peace, safety and security in tourism and tourism assessment and accountability (Nzama, 2008).
63
Many interesting results indicating the impact of tourism development have been reported in previous studies. It appears from the aforementioned investigations that numerous studies on tourism impact were conducted by Western researchers (e.g. Ap & Crompton, 1998; Byrd et al., 2009; Tatoglu, Erdal, Ozgur & Azakli, 1999). Although a number of studies examined the impact of tourism development, very few studies focused on the tourism impact in rural areas, particularly in Malaysia’s perspective. Realizing the gap in the extant literature, more research is needed to investigate the importance of stakeholders’ perceptions towards tourism impact in order to maintain sustainability and long-term success of the tourism industry (Byrd et al., 2009). A major reason for rising interest in this area has been the evidence that tourism leads not only to positive outcomes, but also has the potential for negative outcomes, particularly at community level (Lankford, 1994). In summary, it should be noted from the above literature review, however, that limited studies are available on rural tourism impacts, and this has motivated the present study.
2.2.6 Stakeholders in Rural Tourism Development
In assessing the existing literature, we move from broader and more abstract portrayals of the stakeholder concept to studies addressing the specific use of stakeholders in rural tourism implementation. From the early contributions of tourism planners (e.g. Lane, 1994), the concept of ‘stakeholder’ is becoming more important in tourism, indeed the role of stakeholders in the implementation of rural tourism is becoming more prominent in both academia and industry. According to Freeman (1996) stakeholder is “any group or individual who can affect or is affected by tourism development in an area” (Freeman, 1984, p.46). These groups may influence tourism 64
development in many ways including tourism supply and demand, regulation, the management of tourism impacts as well as human resources (Waligo, Clarke & Hawkins, 2013). In this study, the term of tourism stakeholders can be classified as “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” (Plummer & Remenyi, 2004). The evaluation and analysis of stakeholders has contributed significantly to an enhanced understanding of rural tourism. There are a number of tourism studies involving stakeholder identification and analysis (e.g. Byrd, 2007; Hardy & Beeton, 2001, Waligo et.al, 2013). They play a key role in tourism development, indeed one main key to the success and implementation of sustainable tourism development in a community is the support of stakeholders (included local communities, authorities, tourism operators, and visitors). Recent developments in rural tourism have heightened the need for stakeholders’ support. Indeed, more recent studies have confirmed that stakeholders’ support, participation and involvement in tourism development are needed to gain strong community commitment toward ensuring positive tourism experiences (Cahyanto, Pennington-Gray & Thapa, 2013; Choi & Sirakaya, 2006). There is also a large and growing body of literature that has investigated the attitudes and support of stakeholders towards tourism, while several attempts revealed the significance of a community’s perception and acceptance gives a scholar theoretical and empirical interest in this subject. Stakeholders’ participation and involvement in tourism development, however, has been a significant area of scholarly investigation for nearly 43 years (Choi & Sirakaya, 2006). An extensive review by Oviedo-garcia,
65
Castellanos-verdugo & Martin-ruiz (2008) highlighted three general approaches related to this issue, namely; (i) community-attachment approach, (ii) growth-machine theory, and (iii) social exchange theory. ‘Community-attachment approach’ focused the extent and pattern of social participation and integration in community life. ‘Growth-machine theory’ however, is useful in addressing differences between the attitudes of residents and the attitudes of certain elites, given the assumption that tourism development is driven by powerful urban elite interests rather than local resident interests. Meanwhile, ‘social-exchange theory’ examined the exchange of resources between individuals and groups, focussing on how individuals engage in exchanges if resulting rewards are worthwhile and if the exchange is likely to produce rewards that are perceived to be greater than the costs (Harrill, 2004). Stakeholders’ support in tourism development has been growing rapidly. A considerable amount of literature also has been published on residents’ perception and attitudes. Indeed, tourism scholars have long recognized the importance of gaining stakeholders’ support for the development of a successful tourism industry. For example, there are several studies examining the integration of social exchange theory in tourism development (e.g. Coulson, MacLaren, McKenzie & O’Gorman, 2014; Kayat, 2002; Yutyunyong & Scott, 2009). Understanding and assessing stakeholders’ support and participation in tourism development is important as they are often excluded from not only tourism planning but also decision making and management of tourism projects. Indeed, access for information should be viewed as a transparent process to gain public confidence in any development proposal for tourism planning (Prabhakaran, Nair, & Ramachandran, 2014).
66
Conversely, it is found that support for tourism development was influenced by a number of socio-psychological factors such as perceptions of tourists, tourism impacts, respondents’ employment status, membership in community organizations, as well as awareness of tourism development projects in the community (Sirakaya, Teye & Sonmez, 2002). However, they believed that attitudes and perceptions were the most powerful factors that influenced the stakeholders’ support toward tourism development. In contrast, a study conducted by Byrd (2007) has observed two specific questions that must be answered in order for stakeholders to be successfully included in tourism development. The questions are: (i) who should be considered stakeholders in tourism development, and (ii) how should planners and developers involve the identified stakeholders in the development of tourism? He identified four distinct groups that should be involved in sustainable tourism development, namely: the present visitors, future visitors, present host community, and future host community. However, past study has found that conflicts may emerge between local communities and visitors due to differences in the values felt towards the destination (Yoon, Gursoy & Chen, 2001). They provide an alternative way to increase local participation in tourism planning beyond simply asking for input for development, which involved residents in the construction of tourism experiences. Among the multidimensionality of all tourism studies, the visualizations of stakeholders’ participation are never general enough to offer a global perspective. As with the participation of rural tourism, it is often hard to assume collective truths (Prabhakaran et al., 2014). Indeed, several authors also highlighted the need and the crucial roles of tourism stakeholders in order to implement and manage any project. They believed that a
67
collaborative working group included government officials and non-governmental organizations, host community as well as business owners should be involved in the entire tourism development and decision making process (Byrd et al., 2009; Byrd & Gustke, 2011; Kruja & Hasaj, 2010). In particular, an extensive study by Mascardo (2008) provided a new approach to tourism planning and development. These included four major additional steps (see Figure 2.7): enhancing community awareness and knowledge, consider tourism in broader development context and informed choices, explicitly making a choice to develop, and building community capacity building.
Figure 2.7: Community capacity as a new approach Source: Moscardo (2008, p.176)
68
Within the specific environments, the support of the residents is a key factor in developing and implementing successful initiatives (Oviedo-garcia et al., 2008). Indeed, they suggested that tourism planners should be concerned with the perceptions and attitudes of residents in order to gain their support as tourism development can happen without planning. In particular, since the goodwill and cooperation of the local community is essential for the success and sustainability of any tourism development, the understanding of stakeholders’ views and the solicitation of such support is of great importance (Nunkoo, 2015; Stylidis, Biran, Sit, & Szivas, 2014).
2.3
Rural Tourism as a Sustainable Development Alternative
Sustainable development is a visionary development paradigm. Over the past 20 years, government and private sector businesses have accepted it as a guiding principle (Nzama, 2008). More sustainable development directions are needed. However, this requires new discussion, cooperation and most importantly, dedication from tourismrelated businesses (Tsonis & Cheuk, 2000). Although rural tourism in Malaysia has been under development for a long time, major gaps still exist in this industry, especially in the field of sustainable rural tourism. It is, perhaps, for this reason that increasing attention is now being paid to tourism’s potential contribution to poverty alleviation because tourism has always been viewed as a means of reducing poverty through its contribution to income and employment generation (Sharpley, 2009a). Many efforts have been made to enhance the demand for rural tourism as well as to improve the planning, management and development approaches for rural tourism. Nevertheless, efforts have been insufficient, as of yet, and there are still disturbing
69
issues which do not reflect accepted sustainable rural tourism practices (Castellani & Sala, 2010; Scott, 2011). The development of rural tourism has been seen as a tool to improve the accessibility to remote areas, where it provides wider opportunities between tourists and local communities and the roles of consumers and service providers (Mathew, 2005). It should be given a high value of sustainability and planners must remain aware of the need preserve fragile environments and support conservation (WTO, 2001). Community stakeholders in rural areas, including the state government representatives, tourists, hosts, as well as tour operators and other tourism-related businesspersons should implement ethical codes of conduct and responsibility in order to ensure the sustainability of tourism development. Thus, to cater to the changing demands, there is also a need for greater ties between environmentally-oriented sustainable development and the role of entrepreneurship in economic development in underdeveloped communities (Spense, Boubaker, Gherib & Biwole, 2008). Local communities generally need to ensure that a sustainable approach is taken in regard to the development of other economic activities in the area and that such development does not erode fragile tourism resources. If development is to be sustainable, it must improve the standard of living and quality of life while protecting and enhancing the natural and cultural environment (Reid & Schwab, 2006). In addition, sustainable development for community tourism should improve the quality of life by for everyone involved by optimizing local economic benefits, protecting the natural and built environment, and providing a high-quality experience for visitors. They should aim to provide long-term economic linkages between
70
communities and industries and minimize the negative effects of tourism on the natural environment and thereby improve the socio-cultural well-being of the communities (Nunkoo & Ramkissoon, 2010). Therefore, it is believed that there will be powerful incentives to conserve these resources if the right stakeholders are involved. The next section will further discuss the implementation of sustainability in rural tourism as well as the significance of sustainable tourism in rural areas.
2.3.1 Sustainability for Rural Tourism Development
Sustainable development is now widely promoted as a holistic concept that aims to integrate social, economic and cultural policies to ensure high-quality growth in the context to which it is applied (Egbali, Nosrat & Ali, 2011). Rather than putting the emphasis on whether the tourism industry is sustainable, it is better to focus on its being supportive of sustainable development instead (Gronau & Kaufmann, 2009). As “rural” discussed previously, the term “sustainable” can be defined in various ways according to people’s perceptions and beliefs. According to World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), sustainable development is envisioned as the “activities that respects both local people and traveller, cultural heritage and the environment, which seeks to provide people with an exciting and educational holiday that is also of benefit to the nation’s economy” (WCED, 1987). In contrast, previous studies claimed that there is no single definition for the term of sustainable development in tourism as they believe that a great deal of ambiguity is associated with the concept because it is value laden and interpreted differently by different group (Mahmoudi, Haghsetan & Maleki, 2011). However, Gronau and
71
Kaufmann (2009) claimed that a clear contradiction between sustainable principles and tourism development could be identified in the field of spatial inequality of development. In other words, sustainable development arguably represents the juxtaposition of two separate objectives or processes and may be considered as an equation (Lele, 1991 in Sharpley, 2000). Thus, they added, the theory of sustainable development can be usefully explored by combining development theory with the concept of sustainability. Sustainable development is a visionary development paradigm and the purpose of the integration of sustainable development in studies of things considered rural is to contribute to the knowledge base as to how stakeholders can be more effectively involved in the implementation of it. A sustainable approach in tourism means that neither the natural environment nor the socio-cultural fabric of host communities will be impaired by the arrival of tourist (Ogârlaci & Popa, 2005). Initially, the natural environment and the local communities should benefit from tourism economically and culturally. Indeed, sustainable tourism also must ensure the sustainability and equitability of economic operations, employment opportunities and social services to local community while contributing to poverty alleviation (Dwyer & Edwards, 2010). Besides ensuring the preservation of the environment, tourism activities also preserve the culture of the local communities and provide adequate economic opportunities for local communities whilst guarding them against exploitation (Castellani & Sala, 2010). Due to the nature of tourism industry, sustainable development should be based on coordinated actions between the different sectors involved (Santagata, Paolo & Giovanna, 2007). Indeed, integrated and meaningful multi-stakeholder participation
72
from a broad spectrum of the host communities is needed. At the same time, partnership should be at the federal, states and local level and should be backed by strong political leadership (Ranđelović et al., 2012). Within the extensive body of literature in sustainable tourism, its successful implementation is an emerging and important theme. Indeed, the lack of it or ineffective stakeholder participation is a major obstacle to sustainable development realisation (Waligo et al., 2013). In addition, they also claimed that there is no clear understanding of how best to solve the problems, although there are increasing recommendations for the involvement of stakeholders in sustainable development. Tourism activities by tourism companies and organizations, both at local and national levels, need to be developed in order to adhere to the principles of sustainable development and conducted in collaboration with the various stakeholders (Gronau & Kaufmann, 2009). However, it is noted that little attention is given to purposeful investigation into the roles and responsibilities of local government in addressing sustainable development within tourism contexts (Tang & Jones, 2012; Siti-Nabiha et al., 2009). It is also argued that effective management systems for sustainable tourism development ultimately requires intervention and regulation from the public sector (You, Chen & Song, 2011). The government’s involvement and direction in addressing or attempting to meet the objectives of sustainable development are widely supported by local communities (Ruhanen, 2012). As all stakeholders have the largest potential to being a concrete network for sustainable development of rural tourism and in control of the socio
73
economic development of their own rural area, the efforts of all stakeholders are necessary at each and every stage of tourism development (Bhujbal & Joshi, 2012). In countries like Malaysia, the careful balances of economic and environmental concerns are truly important because the tourism industry also provides important sources of income, employment, and wealth to the country. In ensuring the sustainability of the industry, the protection of the environment is very important. Indeed, sustainable development has become an important criterion in attracting tourists and its sustainability in tourism can only be achieved if all the stakeholders really apply the concept and practices of sustainability (Jaini et al., 2012). Prior studies have noted that tourism can be an important module while introducing the concepts of sustainability in rural areas. Thus, designated forms of tourism based on authenticity and local culture as well as entrepreneurship can connect the aims of sustainability and the interest of the locals to improve their standard of living (Park, Lee, Choi & Yoon, 2012). As mentioned before, there is a need to integrate into a broader sustainable development strategy and other management functions and actions for effective multi-stakeholders’ engagement in line with the strategy that should be implemented (Gronau & Kaufmann, 2009). Besides, sustainable tourism requires a process of planning and management that brings together the interests and concerns of a diverse group of stakeholders in a sustainable and strategic way (Siti-Nabiha et al., 2009). The success of achieving sustainable tourism, however, depends very much on the definition of issues, scope and seriousness as well as full support and commitments from all stakeholders. The design planning of sustainable tourism should be made and 74
presented at every level to ensure consistent understanding of the concept (Delgado & Palomeque, 2012). In reviewing the literature, it is therefore important for regional tourism stakeholders to propose an enhanced sustainable tourism adaption framework because it may contribute to the new school of thought on sustainable adaption, where knowledge is lacking. Indeed, it may also provide a practical tool for sustainable adaption that may be used by policy makers in the adaption process (Njoroge, 2014).
2.3.2 Significance of Sustainable Tourism Development Concept
Two decades ago, the concept of Sustainable Tourism Development (hereafter STD) was virtually unheard of. More precisely, even that the term ‘sustainable development’, as initially proposed by the Brundtland Report, is yet to be applied to the specific context of tourism (Sharpley, 2009b). Sharpley also asserts that attention was paid in the early 1990s to generally look at both the perceived negative impact of tourism and its alternative approach to tourism development, which was later refocused through the specific lens of STD. It is unclear and most probably unimportant to what or to whom the term can be attributed (Sharpley, 2009b). According to an academic perspective, the term STD is embedded as a subject within tourism programmes at all levels. It has become an increasingly popular area of research within the tourism field. In particular, STD also has been clearly discussed, as it should “respect the local culture of the host community through conserving the living cultural heritage and it should optimise the use of environmental resources while preserving the natural heritage and biodiversity” (United-Nations, 2001). In another perspective, STD also has been identified as the “…management of all resources in a
75
way that economic, social and aesthetic needs can be fulfilled while maintaining cultural heritage, essential ecological processes, biological diversity and life support systems” (WTO, 2002 in Lordkipanidze, Brezet & Backman, 2005). Numerous efforts have addressed STD either from a general perspective, within particular contexts such as rural, island or community tourism development or within the guise of ‘eco-tourism’ as a more specific and, perhaps, rigidly defined sub-category of sustainable tourism development (Berno & Bricker, 2001). Indeed, STD represents the dominant tourism development discourse in academics, policy planning and to an extent within political circles. However, the typical ‘blueprint’ approach to sustainable tourism development, which combines Western views of the environment question with principles drawn from the alternative development school (i.e. ‘bottom-up’, community-based development) is only applicable to particular contexts and is of limited relevance to global tourism as a whole (Sharpley & Roberts, 2004a; Sharpley, 2014). It is interesting to note that the tourism industry is one of the most important tools that provide a significant contribution to the economic, social and environmental components of sustainability and can be regarded as a best practice (e.g. Gronau & Kaufmann, 2009; Pastras & Bramwell, 2013; Sharpley, 2009a). In particular, tourism also is being utilized as a ‘free’ natural, cultural and heritage resource that does not need extensive infrastructure support (Sharpley, 2000). The friendly environment concept is an important foundation for sustainable tourism because, in part, tourism development is largely dependent on the natural environment. However, the environment can be the unique attraction for tourists. Thus, it is essential to develop
76
methods of enabling rapid tourism development in a sustainable manner, while maintaining a high quality of environmental protection through coordination of tourism and the environment (Tang, 2015). In spite of the large amount of literature on this topic, a consistent framework of socalled sustainable tourism has not yet been developed. Besides, the general assumption predicting that there can be a sustainable form of tourism is often questioned. Some early studies foresaw the salient and practical issues that should be considered when exploring alternative approaches to tourism, development and the environment. This is supported by Sharpley (2009), who indicated that there is a need for a holistic perspective as the fundamental principle for STD; development can only be sustainable if it is considered within a global political, economic, socio-cultural, as well as ecological framework. In that respect, the development of tourism should be viewed in its totality within the context of global economic, social, and environmental systems. Nonetheless, all forms of tourism should also be considered in terms of their benefits and costs, within that global framework. The coordination in this sector makes the industry stronger and enables it to grow significantly. Reid and Schwab (2006) considered tourism to be a straightforward and economically efficient industry to be developed. Yet few studies have empirically explored this issue. There are debates regarding the nuances of the sustainable development concept as it applies to tourism. Some argue that the management of tourism should be based on the principles of sustainable development (Sharpley & Roberts, 2004). To ensure the sustainability of rural tourism development, a framework should be built to understand the relationship between the local impact
77
tourism and community identity. This has been addressed by Hwang et al. (2011) where they found that community-based action in rural tourism development is connected with a capacity to protect one’s community from outside threats and foster development that aligns with its sense of community identity. In relation to that, McKercher (1993) in Sharpley (2009, p.67) argued that the actual process of developing tourism provides the catalyst for a wide range of potential impacts, which reflects the existence of “fundamental truths” that are relevant to all forms of tourism development (see Table 2.3). They found that it is worthwhile summarizing these ‘truths’ concepts because they not only remain relevant today but also because they identify potential disarticulation points in the relationship between tourism and sustainable development. There are also key issues to be considered when exploring alternative approaches to tourism, development and the environment.
78
Table 2.2: Key issues in sustainable tourism development
Source: McKercher (1993) in Sharpley (2009b, p. 67) It is also important to note that the balanced or harmonious relationship between tourists, the people and places they encounter, and the organizations and businesses that provide tourism services were acknowledged as one of the fundamental assumptions of underpinning the concept of STD (Sharpley, 2014). An instance is the objection raised on the various contradictions between the holistic concept of sustainability and the more product-centred perspective of the global industry (Gronau & Kaufmann, 2009). Illuminating the holistic perspective, Gronau and Kaufmann also view sustainable tourism as a balanced, triangular relation between “host areas and their habitats and people, holiday makers and the tourism industry” with no stakeholder upsetting the equilibrium (see Figure 2.8). This focus on balanced
79
relationship is supported by Sharpley (2000), who holds that the potential for sustainable tourism development exists if no single factor or stakeholder predominates.
Figure 2.8: Equilibrium of sustainable tourism Source: Gronau & Kaufmann (2009) Many authors contend the role of tourism as an agent of socio-economic growth and development has become more pervasive for the developed world. Within the developed world, peripheral or economically disadvantaged regions are increasingly focussing on tourism as a means of stimulating economic and social regeneration (Stolarick, Denstedt, Donald & Spencer, 2010; Tang & Tan, 2015). This is in contradistinction to the practice in many less developed countries where tourism has come to represent a vital ingredient of their development policies. But although tourism has undoubtedly contributed to the socio-economic development of a number of less developed countries, such development is less evident and challenges the widespread belief in tourism’s potential development contribution (Sharpley, 2009a).
80
Sustainable tourism is more appropriately conceived as a continual process of innovation and change than as a steady state. The success of any strategy depends on the characteristics and asset endowments of a particular temporal and spatial context (Pender et al., 2014). The concepts and principles of sustainable rural tourism development can be illustrated in Figure 2.9, which consists of three important elements, namely, social dimensions, environment, and economics. The figure depicts a basic understanding of the concept of sustainable development from the tourism context, which it represents as a sustainable approach to economic, social, and environmental development. Hence, it plays an important role in the spatial development of these aspects and the accruing of benefits to undeveloped regions. In summary, central to the entire concept of sustainable tourism is that the environment, including social and cultural aspects, should be kept in an unimpaired state for present and future generations. Indeed, it may provide enjoyment for tourists and residents alike and become a source of local income and paradoxically lead to conservation efforts to maintain absolute equilibrium (Liburd, 2010). Therefore, it is believed that there will be powerful incentives to conserve these resources if the right stakeholders are involved.
81
Figure 2.9: Principles of sustainable rural tourism development Source: Dwyer & Edwards (2010); Pierret (2012)
82
2.4
Appreciative Inquiry (AI) Approach
Appreciative Inquiry has been applied in the field of community development, especially in developing countries. For example, it was used to create and strengthen community development organizations in India (Lewis, Passmore, & Cantore, 2008). However, even after the successful implementation of the AI approach into the development field, it has been irregularly used for research purposes, especially in the field of tourism (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012; Raymond & Hall, 2008b). Although AI origins are in academia, there is also a considerable body of literature covering its organizational applications and impacts. AI has its roots in organizational development and strategies that help organizations transform themselves. It has traditionally been used as an approach to organization analysis, learning, and development. It is uniquely intended for discovering, understanding and fostering innovations and transformation in human/social systems (Hall & Hammond, 2005; Judy & Hammond, 2006). Different scholars defined the ideas of AI in different ways. In broad literature, the term of AI is generally understood as an alternative approach, an innovative process, a theory, knowledge or a philosophy (Koster & Lemelin, 2009; Lewis et al., 2008; Raymond & Hall, 2008b). For Cooperrider et al., (2008), Cooperrider & Whitney (2005), they defined the Appreciative Inquiry approach as follows; Ap-pre’ci-ate, v., 1. Valuing; the act of recognizing the best in people or the world around us; affirming past and present strengths, successes, and potentials; to perceive those things that give life (health, vitality, excellent) to living systems. 2. To increase in value, e.g., the economy has appreciated in value
83
In-quire’, v., 1. The act of exploration and discovery 2. To ask questions; to be open to seeing new potentials and possibilities
Until now, AI is a group inquiries that identifies and further develops the best of “what is” in organizations in order to create a better future (Preskill & Catsambas, 2006). In their analysis of AI, they claimed that AI is often used in the organization development field as an approach to large-scale change; it is a means for addressing issues, challenges, changes and concerns of an organization in ways that build on the successful, effective, and energizing experiences of its members. Recent development of AI also found that the AI process not only helps an organization to create images of its future but to create an energy, a renewed commitment to change and a sense of hope among the groups of people working to achieve that future (Michael, 2005).
2.4.1
Background of Appreciative Inquiry Approach
Appreciative Inquiry (AI) was first established in 1986 by David Cooperrider in his doctoral thesis on “Appreciative Inquiry: Toward a methodology for understanding and enhancing organizational innovation” (Cooperrider et al., 2008; Cooperrider & Whitney, 2005) It was practised around the world for more than a decade by non-profit organizations, businesses, families, health care organizations, schools as well as governments. Since the late 1980s, AI has been promoted in a wide variety of organizations and for many different purposes. Cooperrider (2014, p.6) extended his work and highlighted that AI’s approach to life-centric, strength-based, instead of deficit-based, and problematizing change, is succeeding over many of the traditional
84
analytic models in business and society. Indeed, AI is not a thing or a static concept, but a methodology for the ongoing co-construction of reality; it is the result of many voices, time and circumstance, planned, and unplanned experiments, new discoveries, and designs, narratives and cases, and unlimited imagination. One of the most significant discussions of AI is a strength-based participatory action research method that is based on the constructivist paradigm and follows a grounded theory procedure (The Mountain Institute, 2000). It serves as a framework for personal development or coaching, partnership or alliance building and large-scale community or organizations (Raymond & Hall, 2008b). The knowledge of AI in the tourism field is also important for generating understanding because the principles of AI provide a universal framework that can enhance and drive a multitude of facets of organizational life (Avital & Carlo, 2004). AI also has been developed to gain and built enduring relationships between communities and the tourism industry based on the simple assumption that every organization or community has something that works well and that those strengths can be the starting point for creating positive change (Finegold, Holland & Lingham, 2002). Indeed, the application of AI in planning and managing conservation and development programs and activities in the tourism field provides an additional approach that helps motivate people to plan and manage a collective vision of the best possible future (Raymond & Hall, 2008a, 2008b). In other studies, AI has been applied to strategic planning, culture transformation, increasing customer satisfaction, organization redesign as well as for leadership development (Clarke, Egan, Fletcher & Ryan, 2006; West & Thomas, 2005). 85
Eventually, AI also has been applied to integrate organizations after a merger, to build alliances and union-management partnerships, for peace building and for implementing educational reform and economic development efforts (Cooperrider & Whitney, 2005). Notably, AI approach has been acknowledged as an increasingly important area, which it offers a positive and strength-based approach to community development (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). Prior to the study by Cooperrider in the 1980s, he discovered that the basic assumption of AI is that an organization is a “solution to be embraced” rather than a “problem to be solved”. Thus, as a method of organizational analysis, AI differs from conventional managerial problem solving. AI comprises a 4-D stage cycle, as shown in Figure 2.10, and starts with selecting a topic: affirmative topic choice. Then, what follows are Discover (appreciating and valuing), Dream (envisioning), Design (co-constructing the future), and Destiny (learning, empowering, and improvising to sustain the future). Each of the phases of the cycle and its application is described as below:
Figure 2.10: The 4D’s of Appreciative Inquiry Approach Source: Cooperrider et al., 2008 (p.34) 86
The four key phases of an AI process, illustrated in Figure 2.10, are as follows: Stage 1 - Discovery The focus of this stage is to explore what is effective and successful in current practice and what contributes to effectiveness. Meanwhile, this stage also will disclose the organization’s or individual’s positive core and investigates the root causes of success. The discovery stage will open the way to building a better future and considering a new possibility by dislodging existing deficit constructions as well as may allow participants to reclaim their ability to admire, be inspired, and appreciate the best in others and in their organization (p.43). Stage 2 – Dream This stage encourages participants to think about ideals and aspirations, about ideas and hopes as well as discusses on how to move forward and develop the best of what exists in either the organization or the individual. Envisioning involves passionate thinking, creating a positive image of a desired and preferred future. Indeed, this stage uses interview stories from the previous stage to elicit the key themes that underlie the times when the organization was most alive and at its best (p.44). Stage 3 - Design This stage asks the individuals, team, and/or organizational members to create an inclusive and supportive environment that will encourage the use of dialogue to think about ways of achieving ideals. This stage is more than a vision, it is a provocative, and inspiring statement of intention that is grounded in the realities of what has worked in the past combined with what new ideas are envisioned for the future. The reason of 87
this stage is to encourage dialogue, which personal conversations may evolve into organizational discourse and individual ideals become cooperative or shared visions for the future (p.45). Stage 4 – Destiny This phase specifically invites participants to construct the future through innovation and action where it includes ever-broadening circles of participants to join in conversation. AI establishes a momentum of its own where, once guided by a shared image of what might be, members of the organization find innovative ways to help move the organization closer to the ideal. This stage may allow organizational members to live into the systems they have designed in ways that translate their ideals into reality and their beliefs into practice (p.46) Recent developments in AI have heightened the development of this approach from a positive paradigm for organizational analysis and change into a method that promotes flourishing (Barros-Pose, 2013). In their study, they have identified the four stages of the evolution of the AI approach through which it has developed (1980s) into its present form (see Table 2.3). Later stages of development have added to earlier stages rather than superseding them.
88
Table 2.3: The Evolution of AI approach
Source: Barros-Pose (2013, p.393)
89
Phase One: Strengths-based approach for change Since AI origins in the late 1980s, it was begun as, and continues to be, a strengthsbased approach for change with the purpose to help organizations move from deficitbased dialogue to possibility seeking. Asking positive questions is part of the AI intervention at this stage in order to draw inspiration from a successful past and cocreate a desired future rather than remediating isolated problems (p.394) Phase Two: Whole System Dialogue Enabled by the AI Summit In the 1990s, AI was implemented through what came to be known as the AI Summit – Whole System Dialogue with purpose to promote dialogue among multiple stakeholders to generate strategic results. In order to facilitate this outcome, everyone should feel that they belong to and play an important role in an organization (p.396) Phase Three: Generating Sustainable Value At this stage, around 2000, the AI process for sustainability emerged with the purpose of visualizing business as an agent for achieving good where this process supported expanding the role of business in society through sharing successful stories of businesses as agents of world benefits (p.399) Phase Four: W-Holistic Appreciative Inquiry The latest evolution of the AI approach in 2012 is where AI had evolved into WHolistic AI to promote connections between the inner and outer dimensions of an organizational system, involving sub-organizations and members at all levels to imbue organizational life with meaning for all members (p.401)
90
One of the most significant of the AI evolutions from the previous study, therefore, is the W-AI Holistic framework. It makes it easier for people to experience the wholeness of AI stage by providing space for deep reflection during the AI process (see Figure 2.11). Indeed, W-AI creates an environment in which the heart leads human connections as members of the same organization, planets, and universe learn how to value one another. From the extensive review of the AI evolution by Brouse- Pose (2013), they stated that the W-AI approach proposes nurturing ‘spaces’ for reflection to increase awareness as participants navigate the AI process. In particular, the WHolistic AI promotes connection, the relationship between the inner and outer realms, cultivating a deeper awareness and connection to a larger whole; hence, it provides space for breathing and deep reflection in the flow of the AI movement.
Figure 2.11: The W-Holistic of AI Approach Source: Barros-Pose, 2013 (p.402)
91
There have been several studies in the literature regarding the powerful nature of the AI approach. Cooperrider et al. (2008) and Whitney & Trosten-Bloom (2010) raised several concerns about the significant potential of this approach. They indicated that inviting people to participate in dialogue and share stories about their past and present achievements, assets, unexplored potentials, innovations, strengths, opportunities, benchmarks, high-point moments, tradition, lived value, core and distinctive competencies, expressions of wisdom and possible futures can be identified as “positive core”. From this, AI links the energy of the positive core directly to any change agenda and this links energy and excitement and a desire to move toward a shared dream. It has conclusively been shown that the art of “appreciation” is the art of discovering and valuing those factors that give life to a group or an organization. Thus, the process involves interviewing and storytelling to draw out the best of the past, to understand what one wants more of and to set the stage for effective visualization of the future.
Inquiry into "the art of the possible" in organizational life should begin with appreciation Discovery: Valuing, learning, and inspired understanding are the aims of the appreciative spirit
Inquiry into what is possible should yield information that is applicable - should lead to the generation of knowledge that can be used, applied, and validated in action Inquiry into what is possible should be provocative - allows use of systematic management analysis to help an organization's members shape an effective future according to their imaginative and moral purposes Inquiry into the human potential of organizattional life should be collaborative - assumes an ummutable relationship between the process of inquiry and its content
Figure 2.12: The proposition underlie the practice of AI Source: Cooperrider et al. (2008), Whitney & Trosten-Bloom (2010)
92
More recent studies have suggested that the AI approach can be used to facilitate positive developments within organizations and that AI could be employed in this way within the tourism industry (Michael, 2005; Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012). Similarly with the study by Nyaupane & Poudel, (2011, 2012) and Raymond & Hall (2008b), they believed that the task of tourism development in rural areas, conservation of environment and livelihood improvement is only possible through the joint effort of a range of stakeholders that includes governments, tourism entrepreneurs, non-profit organizations and local people. It is also applicable and an interesting approach as AI treats people as human beings, not machines (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012). This creates identity and knowledge in relation to one another, such as through the story telling, sharing the same values, beliefs and wisdom (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). Furthermore, Maier (2009) also claimed that AI offers a new way of dealing with organizational development by nurturing positive employee-centred dialogue over deficit-based thinking and problem-solving processes. He recommended the application of AI in tourism research because this approach exhibits the willingness and potential to be “change agents” as a first step to the introduction of AI industry-wide.
93
2.4.2 The Distinctiveness of Appreciative Inquiry Approach
A considerable amount of literature discusses the distinctiveness of the AI approach and how powerful it is compared to other approaches such as problem-based approaches. As a pioneer as well as the father of AI, Cooperrider commented that there are many contemporary debates and questions surrounding the idea of AI, either positive or negative. He stressed that there are clarifications of AI that may be unifying, valuing elements of both and that the ambiguity might usefully push us toward added insight, enhanced logical consistency, and meaningfulness (Cooperrider, 2014). Generally, the AI approach differs from traditional problem solving models by encouraging participants to reflect on and share personal past experiences of achievement (Raymond & Hall, 2008b). Ideally, the illustration of AI can be clearly discussed by taking a quotation by Cooperrider (2014) said that: “AI, as long as it is constructed upon, practiced, or inspired by the sense of the mystery and miracle of life on this planet, will never become inert or lifeless. Why? Because life is alive and AI is about the search for “what gives life”?, to living systems – organizations, communities, industries, countries, families, networks, societies, relationship, and our global living systems – when they are most alive and jointly flourishing in their inseparable and intimate interrelations” (p.6). In addition to this, the other things that makes the AI approach different from other methods are its focus on local strengths and achievements, rather than on deficits and problems (Judy & Hammond, 2006). Indeed, they asserted that AI typically encourages local participation, emphasizes local knowledge, as well as addresses real problems rather than defining needs, problems, opportunities, and obstacles. By building on local strengths and generating a sense of hope, AI avoids the unintended
94
consequences that accompany deficit-based models. In fact, the outcomes are totally surprising to the participants (Hall & Hammond, 2005). Among the reflections that arose, however, Cooperrider & Srivastva (1987) identified that action-research has lost much of the spirit with which it was originally developed and has been unable to meet its potential as a vehicle of social innovation and change. AI was thus put forward as a complimentary, but essentially new and distinct approach to action-research based on three key factors; (i) close the gap between theory and practices, (ii) shift from deficit-based approach, and (iii) differentiated itself from action-based research (Cooperrider and Whitney, 2005). i)
Close the gap between theory and practice
Cooperrider & Srivastva (1987) claimed that AI was proposed as means to close the gap between theory and practices because action-research underestimated the power of theory. Indeed, AI aims to leave behind the common dualistic view of theory and practice by trying to achieve both practical action and generation of new theory. A recent study by Whitney & Trosten-Bloom (2010) revealed that AI shifts the focus of theory from its predictive capacity to its ‘generative capacity’; its ‘ability to foster dialogue about that which is taken for granted’. ii)
Shift from deficit-based approach
AI seeks to provide a shift from a deficit-based approached associated with actionresearch by focusing on the positive and productive aspects of a situation. While traditional approaches to change identify a problem, conduct a diagnosis and identify a solution, AI assumes that all social systems ‘work’ to some extent and therefore
95
organizational practices can be developed by doing ‘more of what works, rather than less of what does not work’ (Raymond & Hall, 2008b). Applying this assumption may not only give an organization a sense of identity and strength but also by moving away from negative image, AI may have the potential to create new beliefs rather than reinforcing existing ones (Boyd & Bright, 2007).
iii)
Differentiated from action-based research
The third key is AI differentiates itself from action-research by moving away from logical positivistic assumptions towards socio-rationalism (see Table 2.4), assuming that ‘the social universe is open to indefinite revision, change and self-propelled development (Bellinger & Elliott, 2011). Table 2.4: Appreciative Inquiry vs Traditional approach Appreciative Inquiry
Problem Solving
Assumption
An organization is a mystery to be embraced
Starting point
Exploration of the organization’s Identification of problem positive core
Approach
Explore the best of what is, envision what might be, dialogue what should be, sustain what will be Finishing point Co-construction of a positive vision for the future Source: Cooperrider and Whitney (2005)
96
An organization is a problem to be solved
Analyse source of problem and develop potential solutions Development of an action plan to treat problem
Appreciative Inquiry has been embraced as a powerful organizational development philosophy building on past success to propel positive change. It is also a highly participative and holistic approach to change the values held by the members of an organization and amplifies positive forces (Fiona, Jillian, Macneill & Vanzetta, 2014). Meanwhile, AI also extends traditional action research through the engagement of storytelling narrative focused on sharing the best from the past directed toward a collective, imagined future (Martin & Calabrese, 2011). In order to show the significant differences of the AI approach, as well as to help understand its implementation and functions, previous researchers and practitioners of AI have developed eight foundational principles (see Table 2.5). They claim that these eight principles arise from several disparate theories (Cooperrider et al., 2008; Cooperrider & Whitney, 2005; Raymond & Hall, 2008b). These unique principles are as special as their derivative practices and move the basis of AI from theory to practice. Table 2.5: Eight Foundational Principles of AI No
Principle
Significance of AI principle
1
The Constructionist Principle (the way we know is fateful)
This research encouraged human communication and collaboration using focus groups in the discovery and dream phases and through developing an online forum in the design phase.
2
The Principle of Simultaneity (change begins at the moment you ask the question)
Constructing interview and focus group questions was approached as an art. Questions were designed with great care to ensure that they were successful in simulating ideas, innovation, and invention.
3
The Poetic Principle (we can choose what we study)
The topic for this study focused on appreciation and generated enthusiasm within the researched sending organizations. Language used throughout this study was success-oriented.
97
4
The Anticipatory Principle (change in active images of the future)
The focus groups and interviews concentrated on the positive core of organizations so that positive images were generated. The use of an online forum helped transform this image into a collective one.
5
The Positive Principle Unconditionally positive questions were used (positive questions lead throughout fieldwork to shift participants’ attention to positive change) towards potentials, dreams, and visions. Data were used to highlight all that is successful about the organizations.
6
The Wholeness Principle (wholeness brings out the best)
In order to access the whole story of organizations, the opinions of as many people as possible who were involved with the organization were accessed. The online forum also provided a way for all to contribute their opinions and ideas.
7
The Enactment Principle (acting ‘as if’ is selffulfilling)
By asking participants to ‘dream’ about a positive future, this encouraged visions and ideals to be enacted in the present.
8
The Free Choice Principle (free choice liberates power)
Each organization and each individual were given the option of whether or not they wished to participate. For those who chose to take part, their participation was openly appreciated.
Source: Cooperrider et al. (2008); Cooperrider & Whitney (2005); Raymond & Hall, (2008b) In particular, the value of an AI approach lies in its focus on locating resources rather than identifying problems, on development rather than training and on harnessing affective as well as cognitive skills (Doveston & Keenaghan, 2006). It was also discovered that the use of AI is different from traditional approaches because it has been acknowledged as a framework for institutional/whole-systems change in a large state institution. In this case, the key to a successful process is how effectively AI shifts participants’ conversations from institutional problems and challenges to a hopeful future (Dole, Godwin & Moehle, 2014).
98
There is also evidence that shows the experiential nature of the AI process was a success in promoting inquiry and dialogue, encouraging collaboration and team building, and empowering individuals towards a collective vision. Hence, the use of AI demonstrated the potential for it as a pedagogical tool, as well as the usefulness of AI as a bridge to creating partnership with multiple stakeholders in organizations (Grandy & Holton, 2010). Recent development of the AI approach has shown another powerful tool called SOAR (Strength, Opportunity, Aspiration & Result) to be a guiding approach to best inquire into Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations and Results, in order to create and sustain positive momentum in leading strategic change using the AI approach (see Table 2.6). Table 2.6: The Powerful tools of AI Approach Appreciative Inquiry Approach Strategic Inquiry
S
Traditional Approach Internal assessment
Strengths What are our greatest assets
O
Opportunities
S
Where we can outperform others
W
What are the best possible opportunities
Apprecia tive Intent
A
Weaknesses Where can others outperform us
Aspirations Who do we want to be and what is our preferred future
R
Strengths
External assessment
Results
O
How we might enhance our successes
T
What are the measurable results we want to achieve
Source: Stavros & Hinrichs (2007); Stavros & Cole (2013)
99
Opportunities
Threats What/ who might threaten our success
2.4.3 The Application and Adaptability of Appreciative Inquiry Approach
AI can be classified as a strength-based participatory action research method that is based on the constructivist paradigm and follows grounded theory procedure (Koster & Lemelin, 2009; Raymond & Hall, 2008b). They recommended applying AI to tourism research for various reasons, i.e. for problem-centric tourism research, whereby understanding the pressing problems and their causes, researchers can address diverse concerns and implement appropriate solutions. More importantly, the AI approach could be an appropriate method and may help to empower rural communities since they are often alienated by the use of technology and technical jargon (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012), and this method does not require respondents to read text-based instrument. Alternative methods like interviews, focus groups as well as brainstorming may encourage participants to speak more honestly about any problems they may have experienced (Raymond & Hall, 2008a). This approach also can serve as catalyst toward fostering open communication and movement of the organizational system toward its fullest potential and serve as an intervention technique capable of uniting divergent work-groups toward a common vision to raise the quality of individual contributions (Maier, 2009). Understanding the poorest of the poor, minority, indigenous people and women is even harder, which compels a need for non-traditional methods of data gathering and verification (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2011, 2012). Indeed, the AI approach has been identified as an appropriate method to gain an indepth understanding of local communities’ knowledge (Koster & Lemelin, 2009; Michael, 2005; Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012). They demonstrated that AI might offer 100
researchers another worldview and methodology for framing and conducting tourism research. This does not mean that AI will replace all research approaches or can overcome all the challenges of conducting research. However, AI can be considered as a new method, approach, or strategy for tourism research that initiates positive changes, especially in rural communities (Koster & Lemelin, 2009; Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012). Michael (2005) discovered that AI has the potential to describe how focusing on the local communities’ involvement served to create a compelling vision of tourism development in their areas for current and future contribution. The power of appreciating and valuing others in AI brings people together and, due to this concept, AI has shown success when applied in both public and private educational settings (Judy & Hammond, 2006). Similarly, in the field of tourism research, AI processes also provided opportunities for local communities and tourism stakeholders to focus on the positive things happening by collaboratively and generatively discovering new possibilities not previously considered. It also emphasizes the generation of positive ideas among individuals within an organization, and these ideas provide the structure for creating positive change and demonstrates what people value about themselves and their community or organization (Laszlo & Cooperrider, 2010). By taking the 4D-Cycle approach of AI as previously illustrated, proponents of the approach argue that AI not only addresses shortcomings of conventional actionresearch, but also presents a number of distinct advantages. In particular, the application of AI in rural tourism studies was significant for few reasons. Raymond & Hall (2008b) stressed that AI provided evidence regarding the potential of taking an
101
appreciative approach in tourism research for both the researcher and the researched. Through encouraging participants to focus on the positive aspects of rural development, examples of rural development success stories were discussed and imaginative ideas for the future were identified. The researcher was therefore able to gain an in-depth understanding of what constitutes good practice in rural development as well as communicate those results to participants. A second significant reason for the adoption of AI is that participants valued the positive reflection that the AI oriented interview/focus group encouraged. This suggests that taking an appreciative approach can make the research process an enjoyable one for all involved. In fact, the AI approach can be conducted in various forms, for example, through pair-interview, group discussions or focus group discussion as well as AI summits (Michael, 2005). Undertaking an AI approach in tourism research does not necessarily mean that ‘feelings of anger or frustration are not voiced’. In fact, challenges and problems still arose during interviews and focus groups conducted in any research (Bodiford & Camargo-Borges, 2014). In particular, during the Dream phase of the AI process, participants often compared their ‘dream’ for the future with the reality of the present, thus highlighting any issues they were experiencing. It is therefore argued that conducting AI simply allowed participants to approach difficulties in a more positive manner by focusing on how the situation could be improved, rather than the problem itself. This observation supports previous research that suggests AI does not ignore negative or difficult experiences but simply reframes problems in a more positive and constructive light (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010).
102
Appreciative Inquiry is an approach that can be adopted in a variety of different areas of tourism research. In organizational and community settings, it provides a valuable and enjoyable way of accessing positive stories and inviting participants to use their imagination. It is also enables individuals to frame their problems more honestly about the challenges they experienced (Hall, 2008). Whatever the inquiry method of AI, participants will take the lead role while the role of researchers is to listen, question, cue, guide and encourage the participants to make success stories of their dreams for the future (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). All participants work together in an inquiry group as co-subjects and both researchers and subjects will participate actively throughout the entire process of an inquiry from the very first step to the end. It is hoped that respondents or the subjects of the study will feel better and more committed in this study as the AI approach was born out of one of the “free-choices liberates power” principles. Respondents are free to choose how and what to contribute and be encouraged to pursue a participatory and collaborative process of inquiry (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012). In other words, the participants, subjects, and interviewees in the AI process are considered as co-researchers engaged in bringing about change through interaction with others.
2.5
Applying theories in Rural Tourism Studies
Generally, there are various types of theories that can be applied and/or adopted in tourism research in order to support and strengthen the scope of the studies. However, most theories that have been adapted in the tourism field were employed from different fields of studies, such as organizational behaviour, economics, management and as
103
well as community development. For the focus of this study, the researcher reviewed two theories, which are Stakeholder Theory and Social Exchange Theory (SET). However, researcher believed that only Social Exchange Theory seemed to productively frame the research objectives for some reasons.
2.5.1 The Concept of Stakeholder Theory in Rural Tourism Study
According to Feeeman, 1984 in Byrd (2007), a stakeholder is identified as “any group or individual who can affect or is affected by” tourism development in an area. The term "stakeholder" has been applied to ecotourism and to activities conducted in natural environments (Jamal and Eyre, 2003). By focusing on ecotourism activities, the major stakeholders would be those in national, provincial and local governments; accommodation, catering, and transport companies and agencies, etc. One main key to the success and implementation of sustainable tourism development in a community is the support of stakeholders, (e.g. communities, entrepreneurs, and visitor). How stakeholders should be included in the sustainable development process can be found in the policy development view of stakeholder theory. Donaldson and Preston (1995) developed three aspects to the stakeholder theory: the descriptive/empirical, the instrumental, and the normative. The three aspects of stakeholder theory indicate the need to identify the interest of all stakeholders. Not all stakeholders need to be involved equally, in the decision-making process, but it does require that all interests are identified and understood. Failure to identify the interest of even a single primary stakeholder group may result in the failure of the process (Clarkson 1995). The focus on more stakeholder participation emphasizes its ability to
104
handles multiple perceived issues (Byrd, 2007). The first issue is that tourism development decisions are made from the top down, where “experts” make decisions. The local community as not being reflective of community interests and opinions perceives often decisions made in this manner. The second issue is that the decisionmaking system is perceived to have competing interests within itself, and, therefore, the decisions made are again not reflective of the public’s interests (Byrd, 2007). The type and extent of stakeholder involvement will greatly depend on time, available resources, and leadership. There are occasions when one or more of these are not available. When one or more are not available, the level of stakeholder involvement will be lessened. Methods to include stakeholders under these conditions can include public hearings, advisory committees, surveys, focus groups, and written comments. If time, resources, and leadership are available, the stakeholders then need to be empowered to make decisions throughout the process and understand that that their participation has the potential to influence the decision. This type of involvement must begin with educating all stakeholders about the issues and interests that are involved in the tourism development. Collaboration, partnerships, and collaborative learning are three methods that allow for this type of involvement of all stakeholders.
105
2.5.2 The Concept of Social Exchange Theory (SET) in Rural Tourism Study
George Homans was an important contributor in developing the concept of SET, introducing it in the 1960s (Choi & Murray, 2010). SET has been applied in various fields of studies, such as economics, management, psychology, and sociology. It is at the forefront of interrogating a resident’s perception of the tourism industry. For example, Choi and Murray (2010) looked into the studies of Ap (1992) and suggested that among the advantages of SET, it has the important fact that in any discussion of SET as exchange of commoditized resources, it immediately brings about value, measure, and rewards as mutual dispensation between active actors. Mutuality between costs and benefits engenders healthy equity in the relationship. This is the chief reason why Emerson (1962, in Choi and Murray, 2010) submits that equity is, indeed, the anchor point for SET. Rewards, costs, and resources became major components of SET. In the tourism industry, researchers have had recourse to adopt and/or adapt SET in developing tourism. For example; assessing residents’ attitudes towards tourism impacts (Brida, Disegna & Osti, 2011; McGehee & Andereck, 2004; Wang & Pfister, 2008), residents’ attitudes towards existing and future tourism development (Abbasi Dorcheh & Mohamed, 2013; Latkova & Vogt, 2011), integration of SET concept (Choi & Murray, 2010), SET in rural tourism development (Chuang, 2010) as well as SET in hospitality conduct (Coulson et al., 2014). The world is now positively infested with SET, as it is a common tool of analysis in the social sciences and became a major theoretical perspective in explaining local communities’ behaviour in tourism development over the last three decades (Chuang, 2010). 106
SET as a theory has guided the study framework in achieving a mutual, goal-oriented set of products and services to be rendered at the SSAF area. SET is a bigger umbrella that acts to unveil advantages accruing to all stakeholders. Another reason for using SET as its theoretical framework is because the findings from the previous studies found that SET is useful in its application in one community because during their exchange advantages, local communities indeed based their attitudes on their evaluations of the impact of tourism (Kayat, 2002; Ling et al., 2011). SET, our chosen and preferred theory, has strengthened the position of this study on SSAF. Consequently, SET is adopted to guide the findings of this study in the SSAF area as well as to investigate the potentials of all stakeholders in SSAF for the advantages of equitable tourism development in the SSAF area. The evaluation of exchange advantages in SET, adapted from previous studies, will be used in this study and is operationalized through the resources owned by tourism stakeholders. This assessment represents a pioneering attempt to explore mutual-end tourism products that are potentially available at SSAF, and match them with tourism development strategies that have the highest probability of delivering truly memorable and unique experiences, as suggested by Kim (2014). SET is used in an advantaged position to exchange benefits in tourism because exchange conditions may influence the stakeholders’ ability to take advantage of the benefits from tourism and their dependence on tourism as a source of livelihood. This is supported with the concept of SET, which if the residents perceive positive consequences prior to exchange, they will likely enter into the exchange programme (see Figure 2.13).
107
Ability to take advantage of benefits from tourism activities Resources owned by tourism stakeholders
Evaluation of exchange (SET)
Mutually End Product of Tourism
Level of dependence on rural tourism
Figure 2.13: The concept of SET in rural tourism study Source: Kayat (2002)
One of the most important aspects of rural tourism is that it converts the common utilization of natural resources such as logging to new, low impact usage (Choi & Murray, 2010). With this understanding, this study believes that rural tourism development at SSAF can be further enhanced based on creativity (level of dependence) and opportunities (ability). SSAF may provide job opportunities, especially for local communities and for those who want to be successful. In fact, it can be one of the new income sources for these people as well as for the economy of the country. Local communities should take advantage of the development of the tourism industry within the area and look at further opportunities that can be developed from this industry. To develop SSAF as a rural tourism segment, which is directly related to human and local people, understanding the parameters of entrepreneurs is necessary. This is because entrepreneurs always look at challenges as opportunities that can be further develop a new business (Zampetakis & Kanelakis, 2010). From this vantage point of business, it has the capacity of contributing to the development of new economies and livelihood improvement, particularly in SSAF’s communities. As a foundation 108
adapting to new rural economy development, it has the direct implication “… that rural entrepreneur is the person who undergo entrepreneurship development in rural areas and at the same time they are able to adapt in any changing environment” (Ahmad, Fauziah, Yusoff, Noor & Kaseri, 2011) A number of studies demonstrated that the key element in SET is exchange of mutual benefits in tourism communities, which communities must develop and promote it, and it must be seen to be serving the needs of the parties. Thus, one must be able to understand the concept and definition of community and tourism development in order to further understand the purpose of sustainable tourism woven around promotion of SET (Coulson et al., 2014; Ling, Jakpar, Johari, Myint & Rani, 2011). Despite this, SET also suggests people evaluate an exchange based on the cost and benefits incurred. An individual that perceives benefits from an exchange is likely to evaluate it positively; one that perceives cost is likely to evaluate it negatively (McGehee & Andereck, 2004). Thus, local communities perceiving their benefiting from tourism are likely to view it positively, and vice versa. Clearly, tourism development in rural areas, regardless of what type of product available, is the important combination of tourism development and entrepreneurship. Coupled with the participation and collaboration of local communities, it is crucial and in need of special attention to ensure the growth of tourism industry of a country, especially in SSAF area. The awareness and the understanding among local communities in rural areas also needs to be addressed because the views and perceptions that people hold of rural areas are different from those they have of urban
109
areas (Mafunzwaini & Hugo, 2005). Such views need to be well coordinated to the advantage of all stakeholders.
2.6
Existing Gaps in Previous Studies
Based on the reviews of rural tourism studies for the past few decades, it is found that there are a few issues identified that require further investigation. The first and most important issue is that there are limited studies to date concerning sustainable tourism development in developing countries, particularly in a Malaysian context (Lo, Mohamad, Songan & Yeo, 2012). Although sustainable development has been widely studied in the tourism field, they have only been carried out in a small number of areas. Therefore, it is believed that a study on the integration of rural tourism and sustainable development may increase yield and level of performance of the tourism industry, particularly at SSAF for current and future contributions. Recommending implementation of substantial involvement of the local residents is also important to sustain the vital rural tourism interrelationship between tourism development, biodiversity conservation, as well as livelihood improvement. Another issue that needs to be highlighted is that of the stakeholders’ view and perceptions. Previous studies have been only concerned with the impact of the industry, neglecting the huge relevance of the views of the stakeholders (Kayat, 2002; Wang & Pfister, 2008). The question that needs to be asked, however, is how stakeholders’ perceptions may influence the development of rural tourism and what are the implications of their perceptions towards tourism industry? This discrepancy could be due to the lack of adequate abilities and skills to contribute to sustainable
110
tourism development and strategic planning in tourism industry. Thus, this study aspires to fill that gap by collecting tourism stakeholders’ views and perceptions (local communities, tourism authorities, tourism operators and visitors) through in-depth discussions and interviews. Based on the extensive reviews of the literature, it is found that studies relating to rural tourism have been relatively scanty and that there are a limited number of studies that focus on the application of the Appreciative Inquiry (hereafter AI) approach in rural tourism, especially in a Malaysian perspective. Although previous researchers have approached rural tourism studies from a variety of dimensions, very few studies have been carried out using the AI approach. Thus, for the purpose of this study, the integration of an AI approach with qualitative methods using focus group discussions and interviews were employed to explore the strengths, potentials, impacts, and strategies in developing SSAF as one of rural tourism destinations in Malaysia from four different groups of stakeholders (i.e. local communities, local authorities, tourism operators, and visitors). Further discussion on AI will be highlighted in the next chapter. This approach is supported by Nyaupane & Poudel (2012, 2011), who asserted that the application of the AI approach (qualitative-based), especially in rural communities, could be an appropriate method. AI may help to empower rural communities since they are often alienated by the use of technology and technical jargon. This method does not require respondents to read a text-based instrument. The combination of both approaches may create a greater understanding on the stakeholders’ perceptions and views related to rural tourism development at SSAF.
111
Taken together, the local authority, tourism operators as well as local communities also need to understand that they play a significant role in formulating, organizing, and coordinating the appropriate policies to develop and promote tourism activities accordingly. Policy-makers will gain benefits by highlighting recognized and unrecognized attributes of tourism development at SSAF, such as expressed in the services and products offered to tourists. Thus, it is believed that a study on the development of rural tourism at SSAF may assist planners to select those alternatives that can minimize negative impacts and maximize support for SSAF’s development. As a result, by this way only the goal of sustainable tourism can be reached. Therefore, this study endeavours to explore the prospect of sustainable rural tourism development at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest, Kedah from Tourism Stakeholders’ Perspective.
2.7
Chapter Summary
Malaysia has a wide range and diversification of tourism segments, such as ecotourism, medical tourism, home-stay products, and rural tourism. Amongst these tourism segments, rural tourism contributes significantly to the Malaysian economy as well as the tourism product offering. It is no doubt that the rural tourism industry not only allows people to reunite with nature and culture of the destinations, it also results in the conservation of the environment, spreading the local cultures, thus positively adding to the economic and social recovery of the rural areas (Baležentis, Kriščiukaitienė, Baležentis & Garland, 2012). In this respect, the study admitted that development of tourism activities in SSAF is to increase the recognitions of rural priorities and potential by policy makers and
112
economic planners. It is also to bring a range of other benefits to rural communities at Sedim area, such as sufficient access for tourists as well as facilities and infrastructural development. The next chapter discusses the study methodology that organizes the study wholly. The first section will address the overall methodology of the study, followed by the research design that will be applied. Subsequently, the data collection tools and procedures and data analysis will be addressed.
113
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHOD
3.1
Introduction
Based on the review of rural tourism discussed in Chapter 2, various methodologies were adopted by previous researchers to examine the provision of rural tourism development in their areas. This chapter will deals with the selection of the research design, which consists of both primary and secondary data. The following section will highlight the collection tools and procedures, consists of the study area, population, and sampling whereas the qualitative techniques will be explained in the following section. The last section of this chapter will discuss the analysis and interpretation of data.
3.2
Research Design
Research design is an important plan that will be used as a guideline to perform research that will be undertaken in any research task. It also plays an important element in any research project and should be appropriate to the aims and questions of the proposed research as claimed by (Creswell, 2009). Like many other approaches, the most common method utilised is a multi-method approach incorporating desk research for reviewing secondary data and a survey, which makes use of Likert-type closed, and open-ended questionnaires for data gathering primary data. However, a high proportion of studies rely on utilising a single method, such as a quantitative approach 114
by means of questionnaires containing closed and open-ended questions or qualitative approaches through interviews or group discussions. In addition, most of the current studies in the tourism field have fully applied the latest data analysis techniques, such as Structural Equation Modelling (SEM), ATLAS.ti, and NVivo. However, some of the studies still rely on common analysis, such as SPSS, Excel and manual coding. The focus of this study is to determine the prospects and future of rural tourism development at SSAF from various perspectives (local communities, tourism authorities, tourism operators, and visitors). Thus, a case-oriented understanding was applied in this study to understand a phenomenon from the standpoint of the participants. This method reflects an interpretive research philosophy that is not geared to identifying causes, but provides a different way to explain social phenomena (Morrison, 2000). Indeed, study of the perceptions of stakeholders in the tourism field should provide insight into their experiences and emotions where qualitative research may provide an accurate information and ideas. Saunders, Lewis, and Thornhill (2009, pg.140) supported that “an exploratory design is useful if we wish to classify our understanding of a problem as well as to discover ideas and insights of the phenomenon”. In relation to that, it is believed that a qualitative methodology is more suitable for the current study as the development of tourism activities at SSAF is part of a meaningmaking process involving complex human thinking and interactions. It was inappropriate to seek a causal relationship and empirical explanations at an early stage of the development. For that reason, the qualitative approach (e.g. interviews and focus groups) was applied throughout the study.
115
As Creswell stated that; ‘Qualitative methods is the most appropriate approach if the study need a complex, detailed understanding of the issue, need to empower individuals to share their stories, hear their voices and minimise the power of relationships that often exist between a researcher and the participants in a study’ (2007, p.g.40). Indeed, it is also suitable to study phenomena that are simply unavailable elsewhere and it can be used for naturally occurring data to find the sequences (how) in which participants’ meanings (what) are deployed (Silverman, 2011, p.g.17) as well as it may provide a better understanding of a situation or condition (Creswell, 2007). By using this approach, Phillmore and Goodson (2004) advise users to follow three principal ways of conducting exploratory research; (i) Searching for literature, (ii) interviewing ‘experts’ in the subject and (iii) conducting focused group interviews. Thus, the researcher applied all of these principles in conducting this research. The following figure shows the flowchart of the steps of the study process;
116
Understanding the literature of the study
The development of RQ and RO
Methods of the study
Primary data
Secondary data
Interviews, focus group discussion
Review, reading and use of literature (books, journals etc.)
Completion of information and data processing
Analysis of data using ATLAS.ti
Interpretations of findings, conclusion and recommendations
Writing and submitting thesis
Figure 3.1: Flowchart of the steps of the study 3.2.1 Sources of Data
Qualitative studies typically gather multiple forms of data, such as interviews, observations and documents, rather than relying on a single data source (Creswell, 2009). There are two types of data that were applied in this study, primary, and secondary data. For the purpose of this study, through primary and secondary data, the empirical study was associated with rural tourism and AI and its practice in
117
organisational settings were identified. Primary data comprised of original data that were collected during the study, which is through few sessions of interviews and two sessions of Focus Group Discussion (FGD). The secondary data, however, consists of the data originally collected or recorded at an earlier date from the secondary sources related to the issues of the study. The main secondary source that was used in this study was through the National Audit Report and Economic Planning Unit Report whereas the supplement sources were gathered from Domestic Tourism Survey, Rancangan Tempatan Daerah Kulim (20042020) and Economic Transformation Programme Report. Moreover, published articles and data related to rural tourism development and to the way it was developed were also used in this study. Unfortunately, the TTW’s Operator at SSAF could not provide us with the necessary data such as the statistic of visitors. Due to this lack of statistical data, we conducted an interview with the Assistant Director of the Economic Planning Unit of Kedah State (UPEN), who gave us very significant confidential information about tourism development at SSAF.
3.2.2 Participants selection
The population samples are those who are involved with, and/or affected by, tourism activities at SSAF. The chosen groups are usually considered to be the most important groups since their involvement in tourism planning and decision making is important for sustainable tourism development (Dabphet, Scott & Ruhanen, 2012). The sampling strategy that was adopted in this study was a purposeful one to enable researchers to determine statistical inferences to a population and intentionally sample a group of
118
people that can best inform the researcher about the research problem under examination
(Creswell,
2007,
pg.
118).
Indeed,
researchers
can
select
individuals/respondents for study because they can purposefully inform an understanding of the research problem and central phenomenon in the study. Qualitative samples tend to be purposive rather than random (Creswell, 2011). Thus, choices of the sample are driven by the conceptual questions, not by a concern for probabilistic ‘representativeness’. Stakeholders or participants for this study have been selected by the Head of the Sedim District, which included those who lived in the tourism zone of Sedim area and those who are directly involved with, or affected by, tourism activities. This ensures the target population will express their feelings and attitudes towards the development of the tourism industry within their areas. The respondents for focus group discussions and interviews were chosen from local communities, local authorities, tourism operators and visitors (see Table 3.1). Thus, the unit of analysis in this study involved a group purposefully selected in the Sedim area, which included in the Table 3.1: Table 3.1: Categories of research participants No
Categories
Participants profile
1
Local Communities
Local residents and youth generation from Kampung Desa Teruna, Kampung Sungai Buloh, Kampung Lindungan Raja, Kampung Tebuan and Kampung Kepala
2
Local Authorities
Expert working for governmental organisation in tourism planning and development at the district and state level
Tourism Operators
People who run and/or managed their businesses at SSAF, including Tree Top
3
119
Number of participants 35
5
7
Walks Operator, resorts, chalets, camping sites and parking services. 4
Visitors
Domestic and international
12
Total Participants
1.
59
Local Communities
The first category of participants was local communities where 35 participants were selected, including 16 local villagers and 19 youths. Different groups of participants were chosen to ensure a balanced and broad based representation of local people involved in the tourism development processes. These included villagers, tourist guides, shop owners and representatives from a women’s group of the village (see Table 3.2). Table 3.2: Categories of Local Communities participants No
Categories
Number Interviewed Communities Youth 8 11
1
Local residents -those who are directly/indirect involved in tourism activities
2
Tourist guides- those who had exposure to tourism activities and development
2
6
3
Shop owners – those who involved in business/ enterprise in village
2
2
4
Women’s representative - local institution formed for women in villages
4
0
16
19
Total
120
2.
Local Authorities
Five local authorities were interviewed and the number was determined based on the researcher’s own judgement from data generated about SSAF, as well as time and resources allocated for this research. The interviews were useful in understanding their experiences and opinions on rural development at SSAF. Participants were chosen from tourism organisations and local planners involved in tourism planning and development at SSAF and in the state generally (see Table 3.3). Table 3.3: Categories of Local Authorities No
Categories
Expert’s profile
1
Director of Kedah Tourism Council
Involved in tourism planning, policy making, product development marketing and promotion at state level
2
Economic Planning Unit of Kedah
Involved in economic planning, monitoring, promotion and community development at state level
2
3
Kedah Forestry Department
Involved in planning, policies, monitoring, rules and regulation related to forestry development
1
4
Kulim District Officer
Independently involved in tourism planning and development in community at district level
1
Total
3.
Number Interviewed 1
5
Tourism Operators
Table 3.4 shows the seven interviews that were conducted with tourism operators who were working and/or managing their business as well as those who are directly involved in tourism planning and development at SSAF. The interviewees were 121
engaged in recreational business, accommodation, public facilities, and services. Since tourism operators in SSAF were directly involved in community and tourism planning, they were a useful source of information on the implementation of the AI approach in this study. Table 3.4: Categories of Tourism Operators No
Categories
Operator’s profile
Number Interviewed 1
1
Recreation Business
Provide services and packages on recreation activities; white water rafting, kayaking - Rapid Fire Adventure Sdn Bhd
2
Accommodation Operators
Provide accommodation business, such as chalet, resort and camping site - Sedim Vista Resort - Sedim Eco Park Resort - Bintang Vista Sedim - Sedim Rainforest Resort - De Teruna Chalet
5
3
Public Facilities and services
Provide public services and facilities, such as parking arrangement, toilets, prayer rooms and shop lots - Desa Teruna Enterprise
1
Total
4.
7
Visitors
The sample for visitors was made up of tourists who had visited SSAF and/ or stayed in the area a few times for at least one day and had average numbers of trips to SSAF. This was to ensure that the visitors were familiar with the area, had used the facilities, and would be able to make a reliable evaluation. To be certain of an overall representation, the interviews were carried out with different types of tourists, which
122
covered domestic and international. The sample of visitors (Table 3.5) was selected based on convenience sampling and three group interviews and two semi-structured interviews were conducted at the site. They were selected to provide a well-rounded representation of the Sedim area as are visitors considered main players in the development of tourism in SSAF. Most visitors provided useful ideas though the sessions and showed much interest in the exercise. Table 3.5: Categories of Visitor No
Categories
Respondent’s profile
Number Interviewed
1
Domestic
Day trip visitors Overnight trip visitors
3 6
2
International
Day trip visitors from China
3
Total
12
There are only three international participants from China were obtained from this study because the limited numbers of international tourist at SSAF. This is important for SSAF to attract more tourists that are international by integrative promotion and marketing strategies. Participants were approached by the researcher and consulted for a suitable date, time, and venue for the interviews. They were briefed on the research objectives, the time required for the interview as well as issues relating to confidentially and anonymity. Most of the participants were involved in voluntary capacity.
123
3.3
Methods, Procedures and Tools for Data Collection
This study attempts to evaluate the prospects and future of rural tourism development at SSAF. A qualitative approach of investigation was adapted as a major approach in this study. Kayat (2002) recommended the use of this approach in order to reveal elements that stakeholders feel they might be exchanging in return for the benefits of tourism development. Indeed, we used qualitative approach also because we wanted to understand the contexts or settings in which participants in a study address a problem or issue (Creswell, 2007). Thus, a qualitative study was embedded for data collection to describe the strengths and potentials of SSAF that can be promoted as well as to enhance the development of SSAF as a rural tourism destination in Malaysia. The study also focused on the understandings tourism stakeholders of the sustainable tourism development concept, particularly in Sedim. Given that the study focused on the strengths and potentials of tourism as it affects all stakeholders at SSAF, the perceptions and support were evaluated extensively in order to determine the impact of tourism development. It is believed that, an in-depth probe would be more valuable than surface understanding. In fact, there is an expressed need to have contact with the stakeholders themselves in order to understand how tourism influences them (Kayat, 2002). A month prior to the start of the project, two research assistants were invited to have a brief description of the research study and the flow of the data collection process. Then, the researcher made contact with several government authorities and tourism operators at SSAF by means of email, telephone calls, and facsimiles. This process made them aware that a study on SSAF development was about to be conducted. 124
Following approval of the proposal by the Faculty of Economic and Management of Universiti Putra Malaysia (Appendix A3), the researcher obtained letters of support from the Head of the Sedim District (Appendix A4) to start the data collection. Before starting the interviews, the research information sheet and consent form (Appendix B1) were distributed to the participants. When they agreed to be interviewed, they were requested to sign the consent form before the interview began. The information sheet contained detailed information about the research including the purpose of the research, the intended information to be collected, and data analysis. It also included a summary of the rights of a participant and assurance of protecting their confidentially and anonymity. The information sheet and consent form were distributed during the sessions and interviews were conducted in the Bahasa Melayu language. Figure 3.2 shows the process and procedures of data collection:
A letter of introduction was prepared by the researcher’s supervisor and obtained prior to data collection
Following approval of the study by the local authorities, potential respondents were contacted by email, telephone calls and mail to request their participation
Informed consent forms to be signed by the participants of the study were prepared
Arrangements for interview times and venues were made upon receiving agreement to participate in the study
Key persons in several local authorities, government offices and tourism operators were contacted for support request
Interviews were conducted using interview guides and audiotaped for content analysis
FGD and interviews session were transcribed and translated for preliminary analysis in order to facilitate interview sessions with the rest of the respondents.
Figure 3.2: The process and procedures for data collection 125
3.3.1 Appreciative Inquiry approach at the site
Appreciative Inquiry approach was applied as the primary method for qualitative data collection in this study to reveal the understandings, opinions, and attitudes of tourism stakeholders concerning the development of SSAF. Because of the perceived value of the method and its adaptability discussed in previous chapter, an AI approach was carried out to assess the potential of applying AI as a methodology in tourism research. Thus, this study attempted to develop a framework of good practice for rural tourism development by taking an appreciative approach throughout the research process. The application of this approach was focused on four different types of stakeholders, which is local communities, tourism operators, visitors as well as the local authorities that are involved in the tourism development at SSAF. Due to a growing amount of critical research on rural tourism, an appreciative approach was utilised as a potential means for generating new insights and agendas that may not have arisen in previous studies given their different methodologies (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012). As mentioned before, there was limited studies have been done in the previous research related to the area of Appreciative Inquiry, particularly in rural tourism segments in Malaysia. Therefore, this study could contribute to the novelty and state of the art knowledge. Moreover, the results from interviews and focus groups showed that taking an appreciative approach may encourage participants to speak more honestly about any problems they may have experienced (Raymond & Hall, 2008b). In order to develop an appropriate AI approach in this study, three key steps were taken as developed by Raymond & Hall (2008b). First, the change agenda was considered 126
and the following questions addressed: “What are you trying to accomplish? What is your purpose?” This stage involved developing clear research objectives that could be linked to AI. Second, the following questions regarding the form of engagement were asked: “What is the most appropriate form of engagement given your change agenda, community and resources?” (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). Third, an inquiry strategy was developed that responded to the question: “Having identified the purpose and form of engagement, what decisions and steps must you take along the way to ensure the development’s success? (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010). This inquiry strategy (see Table 3.6) provides a practical example of how the 4-Ds of AI can be adapted to suit the focus and objectives of this study. Table 3.6: Inquiry strategy of the study Stage Grounding
Discovery (appreciating and valuing the best of ‘what is’)
Dream
Steps
Purpose
1) Contact the Head of the Sedim District and invite their participation
- Obtain their full support and to get closer with them
2) Observe the positive aspects of tourism development by focusing on what they are visibly achieving and how they are doing this (discovery)
- Reinforce existing positive imagery and develop positive visions by focusing on the benefits and success of rural development
3) Conduct group discussions with local residents and youth groups. Explore what is effective and successful in current practices (discovery) and discuss ideals and aspirations for the future (dream)
- Bring together characteristics of successful development projects so that a preliminary framework of good practice for rural development can be developed.
4) Conduct interviews with representatives of local authorities, tourism 127
(envision ‘what could be’)
operators, and visitors. Explore what is effective and successful in current practices (discovery) and discuss ideals and aspirations for the future (dream)
Source: Raymond & Hall (2008b) Taking into account the inquiry agenda and the study context, this study intends to adopt a new form of the five-step AI process recommended by Nyaupane & Poudel (2012). They believed that the AI approach could be an appropriate method and may help to empower rural communities since they are often alienated by the use of technology and technical jargon. This method also does not require participants to read text-based instruments and alternative methods likes interviews, focus groups as well as brainstorming may encourage participants to speak more honestly about any problems they may have experienced (Raymond & Hall, 2008a). However, this study adopted only three stages from the five phases recommended, which are 1) Grounding, 2) Discovery and 3) Dream (see Figure 3.3) due to the limited skills using this approach for the study.
128
Figure 3.3: The Processes of Appreciative Inquiry Approach Source: Nyaupane & Poudel (2012) Stage 1- Grounding phase There are four steps that will be conducted throughout this step; 1.
Rapport building - to obtain their full support and to discuss the research aims, research methodology and the benefits of this research to the SSAF’s communities and tourism stakeholders in general.
2.
Stakeholders’ identification and selection of participants - to identify key stakeholders and select participants. For the purpose of this study, the Head of the Sedim District, Mr Zulkifli Bin Omar, managed the number of participants that were involved in AI sessions.
3.
Orientation on research objectives and research methodologies - to inform the participants about these research goals, to introduce the AI process and to clarify how it is different from a traditional deficit-based problem-solving approach.
129
4.
Development of interview protocol - to develop the AI interview guidelines and AI’s protocol
Stage 2- Discovery phase Participants at this stage will reflect on and discuss the best of what is concerning the object of inquiry. During this stage, participants were interviewed about their own best experiences, which appear to be a key of AI innovation. Personal and organisational highpoints were discovered, as well as what people value and how they hope and wish to enhance their communities’ social, economic and environmentally vitality. Stage 3- Dream phase Participants were asked to picture their group’s ideal image and try to figure out the common aspirations of all stakeholders and create a symbolic representation of that image. This stage also requires participants to carefully listen to stories about their group at its best and to share their hopes and dreams for their collective future (Cooperrider et al., 2008). Positive images of the future emerges from past real-world examples; the results of this phase tend to be symbolic and qualitative, not as much a statement of principle as an aspirational ideal. This helps create a clear results-oriented vision and uncover potential while asking higher-purpose questions, such as “What might be?” When the best of “what is” was identified, the mind naturally begins to search further and to envision new possibilities (Cooperrider et al., 2008). It is important to note that one of the benefits of AI is that it could be easily adopted to any particular culture, context and environment (Whitney & Trosten-Bloom, 2010) and may encourage studies to build a strong and reliable foundation in uncovering
130
attitudes, perceptions and ideas of local communities and tourism stakeholders (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2011). AI was applied as a tool for community change, development, and enquiry while providing a rather positive view than a problemoriented lens on the community. The choice of topics, the content of the questions and how many of the phases implemented are all dependent on the organisations and the purpose of the inquiry (Preskill & Catsambas, 2006). Nevertheless, the AI approach is still developing and new approaches are continually emerging and evolving (Raymond & Hall, 2008a). In fact, they also claimed that there were three significant key reasons of the application of AI in tourism study: (i)
AI provided evidence of the potential of taking an appreciative approach in tourism research for both the researcher and the researched.
(ii)
Taking an AI approach can make the research process an enjoyable one for all involved as participants had valued the positive reflection that the AI oriented interview/focus group encouraged.
(iii) Conducting an AI simply allowed participants to approach difficulties in a more positive manner by focusing on how the situation could be improved, rather than the problem itself.
131
3.3.2 Focus Group Discussions
Qualitative methods was promoted due to the fact that it may offer varied empirical procedures designed to describe and interpret the experiences of research participants in a context-specific setting (Dabphet et al., 2012). More importantly, this method also allows studies to become more of an “insider” and thus potentially they can discover the culture and worldviews of social actors (Berg, 2001). AI also may assist this study to gain a deeper understanding of specific issues by them listening to and what the study participants revealed at SSAF. During our survey and FGD sessions, we tried to utilise few components that answered all the research questions, particularly from these groups of participants, as they are the pioneers and close to SSAF. For exploring the opinions from a local communities’ perspective at SSAF, the researcher used; (i) focus group discussions (divided into 2 groups) and each group discussion took between one to three hours to obtain in-depth information from the participants. In order to get the number of the participants according to our criteria, the Head of the Sedim District (or Headman) was contacted to choose and call the participants. Using this approach enabled this study to address a particular topic of interest and learn about the biographies and life structures of group participants as asserted by (Baxter & Jack, 2008). The researcher set the time, date, and location for the discussion and we managed to call 45 participants. However, only 35 participants were available for these sessions. The first group of participants was the local communities where we did the session from 2.30pm until 4.15pm whereas the second group was done in 1 hour and 50 minutes from 8.50 pm to 10.45pm on the same day. The Community’ Hall of Kampung 132
Lindungan Raja, Sedim was chosen for FGD’s sessions in consultation with the Head of the Villages. A discussion guide and protocol of FGD’s sessions (see Appendix B2) was used, which were recorded by research assistants using digital recording devices for audio and video (with the consent from the participants). Shorthand notes also were taken during the interview to highlight the important information given by the participants. There were a few elements that were discussed during the session: the general information related to the study, the communities’ support for tourism, the impact of tourism as well as the opinions and experiences of communities involved in tourism activities at SSAF.
3.3.3 Semi-structured Interviews
Meanwhile, the semi-structured interview sessions were conducted with a particular group of participants that consisted of visitors, tourism operators, and local authorities who were directly involved in the tourism planning and development at SSAF. As discussed in the sampling process, 24 participants were invited for the interviews and the participants were categorised into three groups: local authorities (e.g. policymakers and administrators), local tourism operators (managing business at SSAF), and visitors (local and international). The primary method of data collection was the semistructured interview technique undertaken by the researcher because it is approach is useful for accessing individuals’ attitudes and values where things that cannot necessarily be observed or accommodated in a formal questionnaire (Silverman, 2011).
133
One of the sampling principles in qualitative research is to stop interviewing at the point of ‘saturation’ (Kayat, 2002). This principle was followed as, in each categories of participants (e.g. five from local authorities and seven from tourism operators), no new participants were interviewed when these were the only persons that involved and/or responsible towards the development of tourism activities at SSAF. Meanwhile, when the researcher felt that no new information would be uncovered from the next participants, thus no new visitors were interviewed to answer the research questions. Participants were asked to share their views on the salient strategic developmental issues in rural tourism development. Open questions were applied to allow opportunities for probing in order to obtain further insight and richer data (Silverman, 2011). Additionally, the approach attempts to enable understanding the complex behaviour of society without imposing any prior categorisation that may limit the field of inquiry (Riley & Love, 2000). Three different interview guides and questions were developed, one for each of the local authorities (Appendix B3), tourism operators (Appendix B4), and visitors (Appendix B5). In general, the interviews focused on the following themes: general information of the study sites, contributions of tourism development, tourism impact, involvement, opinions, and experiences of participants about rural development at SSAF. All interviews were conducted face-to-face and each of the interview sessions lasted approximately between 40 to 50 minutes, conducted from November 2013 to March 2014. Most of the participants suggested that the interviews be conducted at their office or premises. Thus, the interview sessions were held at chalet/ resort/ premises (for tourism operators), formal offices (for local authorities) and the Sedim area (for visitors). 134
3.3.4 Validity, Ethics and Instrument Measurement
Validity Checks The research findings should be as trustworthy as possible and every research study must be evaluated in relation to the procedures used to generate the findings. Indeed, they add to the usefulness of concepts for describing trustworthiness differs between the qualitative and the quantitative research traditions (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004). In this study, the concept proposed by Graneheim and Lundman (2004) was used whereby they stated that validity and reliability have ‘the same meaning’ irrespective of research tradition and nothing is gained by changing labels. Thus, the instrument validity in this study was examined in several phases, which included a pilot test. At the first stage, draft of questions were developed based on literature reviews and previous studies on Appreciative Inquiry and rural tourism, which was written in English as suggested by Nyaupane & Poudel (2011). Three supervisory committees who were looking at terminology and clarity of the questions validated the questions. Based on suggestions provided by the colleagues and the committees, several minor changes were made. Most of these involved the wording and arrangements of the questions in the interview guide. Although the questions were prepared and developed in the English language, however, the interviews and discussions were conducted in Bahasa language, as most of the participants were more comfortable in that manner of speech. The second steps were validated using the ‘Member’s Checking’ approach to determine the accuracy of the qualitative findings through taking the specific
135
descriptions as suggested by Creswell (2011). These included local communities at Sedim during the process of pilot study, which involved conducting a follow-up interview with participants and providing an opportunity for them to comments on the findings. As Bryman and Bell (2011) suggests “conducting a pilot study can be beneficial before embarking on the main data-collection exercise and it can be used to test out all aspects of the survey, not only the questions”. Based on the suggestions given by pilot study participants, minor adjustments were made, some of which were associated with question wordings. Few other suggestions include changing some lengthy questions and some technical jargon, which made participants uncomfortable. Ethical Consideration As the study involved individuals, ethical procedures had to be clarified by consulting the ethical guidelines provided by University Putra Malaysia, which consists of respondent’s information sheet, consent form, and letter of confirmation. Therefore, to comply with its guidelines, an ethics approval that details and describes any inquiry that involves human beings as primary sources in the data collection process, was sought prior to administering the FGD and interviews. Maintaining confidentially and anonymity are also important aspects in social science research (Silverman, 2011). For this study, names and contact details were collected and kept separately from transcripts/data. No names or contact details of the participants were disclosed in any written or oral presentation or in general discussion. To avoid bias in this study due to the researcher’s familiarity with the case study sites, her personal views on both AI process and the tourism development project were not revealed. Instead, the participants were encouraged to give their own views regarding the sites. Probing 136
questions to the participants were used and repeated until the researcher was clear on the views expressed. The Researcher as an Instrument The application of the AI approach in this study requires a researcher to be directly involved in the whole research process, or in other words: the “researcher as an instrument”. As previously mentioned, the data were collected through FGD and interviews, which required interaction between the researcher and the participants. Indeed, the researcher’s knowledge and experience related to the phenomenon was needed to be occasionally shared with the participants because participants may not share their ideas and thoughts if they found that the researcher was unfamiliar with the topic of discussion. With that matter, one set of FGD protocol and three sets of similar interview protocols were developed, one for tourism operators, one for government official, and the other one for local and international visitors at SSAF. The interview guides were adapted from an AI handbook protocol developed by Cooperrider and Whitney (2008), which comprised an introduction and details of interview procedures from stage one (Grounding), stage two (Discovery) and stage three (Dream). Interview protocols and guidelines were prepared for the group discussions and interviews to develop and clarify certain issues. FGD and interview guides were divided into sections based on the objectives and aims of the study and each aims was used as a topic for guiding the development of open-ended questions. Additional, a small-scale questionnaire was developed to specifically collect demographic variables, which included gender, age group, education level, income level, types of business or positions, personal background or experiences in related 137
tourism fields and background organisation. While not all demographic data were used to compare opinions and views, they will be referred to in discussions. Data gathered through these questionnaires were analysed and presented in the following chapter. Strategies to avoid bias in qualitative study According to Sekaran and Bougie (2013), the information obtained during the interviews should be as free as possible of bias. They claimed that bias refers to errors on inaccuracies in the data collected and the interviewer, the interviewee, or the situation could introduce it. From the perspective of the interviewer, bias could be introduced based on following conditions: 1. If proper trust and rapport are not established with the interviewee, or 2. When the responses are either misinterpreted or distorted, or 3. When the interviewer unintentionally encourages or 4. Discourages certain types of response through gestures and facial expressions
(Sekaran & Bougie, 2013, p.g.121) In addition to that, interviewees also can bias the data when they do not come out with their true opinions but provide information that they think is what the interviewer expects of them or would like to hear. Hence, if they do not understand the questions, they may feel diffident or hesitant to seek clarification. They may then answer questions without knowing their importance and thus introduce bias. They may, therefore, not provide truthful answers but instead deliberately offer incorrect responses. Some respondents may also answer questions in a socially acceptable manner rather than indicating their true sentiments. With those matters, however, the study believed that these biases could be minimized in several ways as suggested by 138
previous studies (e.g. Sekaran and Bougie, 2013 & Creswell, 2009), which have been implemented in this study; 1.
Establishing credibility and rapport and motivating individuals to respond
In order to obtain honest information from the participants, the researcher/ interviewer has established rapport and trust with them. In other words, the researcher should be able to make the respondents sufficiently at ease to give informative and truthful answers without fear of adverse consequences. This has been applied concurrently during the grounded stage in AI process. The researcher must establish rapport with and gain the confident and approval of, the hiring participant before they can even participate in the interview sessions. Knowledge, skills, ability, confidence, articulateness, and enthusiasm are therefore qualities a researcher must demonstrate in order to establish credibility with the participants and stakeholders. 2.
The questioning technique during interviews
Few techniques have been applied throughout the interview sessions such as funneling, unbiased questions, and clarifying issues. At the beginning of an unstructured interview, it is advisable for the researcher to ask open-ended questions to get a broad idea and form some impressions about the situations. For example, a question that could be asked; What are some of your feelings about this village/ organization/ Sedim? From the responses to this broad question, further questions that are progressively more focused have been asked as the researcher processes the interviewees’ responses
139
and notes some possible key issues relevant to the situation. This transition from abroad to narrow themes is called the funnelling technique. Second technique that has been applied to avoid the bias in this study called unbiased questions. It is important for the researcher to ask unbiased questions to ensure the researcher can minimize bias in the responses. For example, “Tell me how you experience tourism activities in Sedim” is a better question than, “Boy, tourism activities here must be really boring; let me hear how you experience it”. The latter question is “loaded” in terms of the interviewer’s own perceptions of the job. A loaded question might influence the types of answers received from the participants. In addition to that, Sukaran and Bougie (2013) also stated that bias could be introduced by emphasizing certain words, by tone and voice inflections and through inappropriate suggestions. Thus, to make sure that the researcher understands issues as the respondent intends to represent them, it is advisable to restate or rephrase important information given by the respondent. For instance, the interviewee says, “There is an unfair management policy in tourism development at Sedim; local residents do not involve at all- outsiders who always get attention” the researcher might interject, “So you are saying that outsider always gets attention over the heads of even involvement residents”. Rephrasing in this way clarifies the issue of whether or not the respondent considers involvement important. If certain things that are being said are not clear, then the researcher should seek clarification. This is one of the questioning technique called clarifying issues.
140
3.
Helping the respondent to think through issues
Some of the respondents are not able to verbalize her perceptions or replies; “I don’t know”, then the researcher asked the question in a simpler way or rephrase it. For example, a respondent is unable to specify what aspects of Sedim he dislikes, and then the researcher asked the question, which makes them clear such as “Which are of Sedim he would prefer to get close”. In this way, the respondent can sort out which aspects of the Sedim he likes and enjoy. 4.
Taking notes
When conducting interviews, it is also important that the researcher makes written notes as the interviews are taking place or as soon as the interview is terminated. The interviewer should not rely on memory because information recalled from memory is imprecise and often likely to be incorrect. Since this study has more than one interview scheduled for the day, therefore the amount of information received increases, as do possible sources of error in recalling from memory who said that. Information based solely on recall introduces bias into the research. Thus, recorded tape was used during the interview with the permission from the participants and their anonymity was preserved in full although their voices are being recorded.
3.4
Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data
The analysis process can be enhanced in various ways either manually or by using computer software. Programs designed for qualitative data can speed up the analysis process, make it easier for researchers to experiment with different codes, test different hypotheses about the relationships as well as facilitate diagrams of emerging theories 141
and preparation of research reports (Morrison, 2000). The steps involved in computerassisted qualitative data analysis parallel those used traditionally to analyse text, such as notes, documents, or interview transcripts: preparation, coding, analysis, and reporting. For the purpose of this study, all the data (focus groups and interviews) were recorded using a voice recorder and video recorder to ensure the validity of the data collection process. Once finished, data were transcribed verbatim, which began with a search of key themes using open coding and memos. There are various forms of data management and analysis techniques and tools available in social science (Bryman & Burgess, 1994; Thomas & Harden, 2008). For this purpose, the ATLAS.ti qualitative computer database programme was applied to prepare and analyse the FGDs and interviews in the analytical program. All audio files were saved in different folders on the computer to be transcribed into text. All the interviews were transcribed by the author and transferred into electronic form (word) by replaying specific parts of the audio files to ensure the transcription was correct. Instead of a word-to-word transcription, only the relevant parts were transcribed. While playing the audio files, unnecessary material, such as side leaps, repetitions, and unimportant details were ignored to concentrate on making a condensation of the relevant parts associated with the research questions. Every transcript was provided with the specific name of the audio-file, the date of recording and the duration time of the interview given in minutes. Before converting all the Word files into RTF for importation into ATLAS.ti, the Word files were spell checked to qualify the search facility in ATLAS.ti. The analysis of the data as well as the coding process and resulting coding scheme using ATLAS.ti is described in detail
142
(section 3.4.1). The process for data analysis in this study have several components, it involves; (i) making sense out of text and image data, (ii) preparing the data for analysis, (iii) conducting different analysis, (iv) moving deeper and deeper into understanding the data, (v) representing the data and (vi) making an interpretation of the larger meaning of the data (see Figure 3.4)
Figure 3.4: Qualitative data analysis of the study The next section describes the use of codes and the generation of a coding scheme using ATLAS.ti program.
3.4.1 ATLAS.ti Programme
A computer program such as ATLAS.ti was used to analyse the data not because it differed distinctively from the other existing qualitative research software programs, i.e. NVivo. But because ATLAS.ti offers a variety of tools for accomplishing the tasks associated with any systematic approach to unstructured data, e.g. data that cannot be 143
meaningfully analysed by formal, statistical approaches (Muhr, 2004). Additionally, this software also helps to explore the complex phenomena hidden in the data besides offers tools to manage, extract, compare, explore, and reassemble meaningful pieces from large amounts of data in creative, flexible, yet systematic ways. ATLAS.ti program also offers a powerful and intuitive environment and serves as a powerful utility for qualitative analysis, particularly of larger bodies of textual, graphical, including interview transcriptions, PDFs, Microsoft Word documents, html, pictures, and even audio and video recordings (Muhr, 2004). The sequence of steps and the processes involved using ATLAS.ti is shown in Figure 3.5 and described in detail below.
Figure 3.5: The ATLAS.ti workflow Source: Muhr (2004, pg. 28) Muhr (2004) explained that the main principles of the ATLAS.ti philosophy are best encapsulated by the acronym VISE, which stands for Visualisation, Integration, Serendipity, and Exploration. The Visualisation component of the program means directly supports the way human beings think, plan and approach solutions in creative,
144
yet systematic ways. Another fundamental design aspect of the software is to integrate all pieces that comprise a project, in order not to lose sight of the whole when going into detail. Therefore, all relevant entities are stored in a container, the so-called “Hermeneutic Unit” (HU). ATLAS.ti was develop as a tool that effectively supports the human interpreter, particularly in handling relatively large amounts of research material, notes and associated theories. In fact, it was designed to be more than a single tool: think of it as a professional workbench that provides a broad selection of effective tools for a variety of problems and tasks (Muhr, 2004). Thus, two main principles modes of working with ATLAS.ti were created, the Textual Level and the Conceptual Level. The Textual Level includes activities like segmentation of data files; coding text, image, audio, and video passages; and writing memos.
Figure 3.6: Sample of Text-Structure-Text in ATLAS.ti Program Source: Muhr (2004, pg. 26) The Conceptual Level however focuses on model-building activities such as linking codes to networks (see Figure 3.7). Another and equally important aspect in ATLAS.ti is the management of projects and the data. However, using a qualitative data analysis computer program likes ATLAS.ti is not always as straightforward as it appears. Yet,
145
it still has some difficulties and challenging in using a computer program to identify instances of the concepts of the phenomenon (Muhr, 2004).
Figure 3.7: Sample of Conceptual Level Work Source: Muhr (2004, pg. 26) 3.4.2 Thematic analysis and the coding process
Qualitative research is analogous in many ways to martial arts. Approaches to qualitative data collection and analysis are numerous, representing a diverse range of epistemological, theoretical, and disciplinary perspectives (Stirling, 2001) and thematic analysis should be seen as a foundational method for qualitative analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). It is the first qualitative method of analysis that researchers should learn as it provides core skills that will be useful for conducting many other forms of qualitative analysis. Yet most researchers, throughout their career, cling to one style with which they are familiar and comfortable, to the exclusion (and often disparagement) of all others. From their point of views, the theoretical or philosophical foundation provides a framework for inquiry, but it is the data collection and analysis processes and the outcome of those processes that are paramount. From such a perspective, it does not make sense to exclude a particular technique because of
146
personal discomfort with it, or misconceptions about or prejudices regarding how and why it might be used. From a methodological standpoint, codes serve a variety of purposes. They capture meaning in the data and serve as handles for specific occurrences in the data that cannot be found by simple text-based search techniques (Silverman, 2011). Codes are typically short pieces of text referencing other pieces of data and can be used to classify an often large number of textual or other data units (Thomas & Harden, 2008). In the realm of information retrieval systems, “codes” and “coding” correspond to terms like index, indexing and keyword (Saldana, 2008). For the purposes of this study, codes were used as indexing devices at different levels of abstraction in order to create sets of related information units for the purpose of comparison and analysis. Three coding activities implied in the process of coding: open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. However, only the “open and axial coding” approaches were employed in this study for the FGD’s and interviews data. Open coding refers to “the analytic process through which concepts are identified and their properties and dimensions are discovered in data” (Morrison, 2000). Through open coding, data are broken down into discrete parts, closely examined for similarities and differences and given a name that represents or stands for it. Events, happenings, objects and action that are found to be conceptually similar in nature or related in meaning are grouped under a more abstract concept termed a category. Categories are concepts, derived from data that stand for phenomena, which are important analytic ideas that emerge from data. These phenomena depict the problems, issues, concerns, and matters that are important to those being studied. The name chosen for a category
147
is usually the most logical descriptor for what is going on whereas the naming of categories generally depends on the research context. Thus, the categories both depend on and reflect the focus of the research. Axial Coding however, refers to “the process of relating categories to their subcategories”, termed “axial” because coding occurs around the axis of a category, linking categories at the level of properties and dimensions (Creswell, 2009). The purpose of axial coding is to begin the process of reassembling data that were fractured during open coding. Categories in axial coding are related to subcategories to form more precise and complete explanations about the phenomena (Rabiee, 2004). This may, however take place concurrently and will run simultaneously with the process of sharing individual stories within the group of data (FGD and interviews). Besides the application of ATLAS.ti program, data also were analysed on an informal basis throughout fieldwork with the objective of adapting interview questions and becoming familiar with the data. This followed by the main phase of data analysis involving an in-depth analysis of interviews and focus group transcripts from each of the interviews that will be employed in the whole phases of AI. As stated by Cooperrider et al., (2008), the data obtained from an AI approach can be analysed and displayed in various form, such as diagrams, charts, tables, pictures, storybooks, newsletters and other visual aids. For the purpose of this study, three different approaches were applied, which are tables, diagrams and networks as these approaches are more easily applied by local people as compared to other approaches. Cooperrider et al. (2008) also claimed that the search for one perfect method to make sense of data is not the goal of a study because there is no single right way to analysing 148
data. What is important is finding creative ways to organise, listen, and understand what is being said from multiple perspectives, both during and after the interviews. The process of coding started with two focus groups from the first discussion, followed by the same procedure and strategy for the rest of the interview sessions. However, the open coding of the interviews did not start from scratch. However, it was guided by the emerging coding list, which was activated in ATLAS.ti whenever a relevant quotation or text had been identified, as shown in Figure 3.8. The quotation to be coded is highlighted then the coding scheme is activated (the symbol next to be the arrow). After the selection of code(s), the assigned codes are shown in the right column next to the quotation.
Figure 3.8: An example of a data being coded in ATLAS.ti. After the initial coding of the interviews, the codes were reviewed in order to identify relations between codes that might form a category or class in line with the principle of “axial coding”. However, instead of using the network tool in ATLAS.ti to establish and express hierarchical and associative relations between codes, relevant relations 149
between codes were pre-coordinated by generating a new code. The pre-coordinated relation was generally of the type ‘is associated with” or “is part of”. The outcome of the coding process was shown in Appendix C3 (for discovery stage) and Appendix C4 (for dream stage). In addition to coding process, the data mining process is not meant to search for a norm or fitting data. Instead it prepares an inclusive list of themes with which the analysis began by isolating important themes found in the responses and coding them (Saldana, 2008). Once the interview process was completed, it was time to make sense of the data, modified occasionally whenever new themes emerged. Findings are presented for each question asked and grouped under each aim of the study. It is also important to look for common threads and anomalies as well as focus and the meaning of the data. The meanings of these data form the foundation of dialogues that inspires the dreams based on the best stories told (continuity) and the best of what will come (novelty) (Cooperrider et al., 2008). Coding the data under the key themes may require recoding under new, emerging themes based on the conversations around the original themes. A primary goal is to reduce and interpret the meanings and through dialogues, confirming that these are the interview meanings. That is why the ATLAS.ti program is helpful in this process and is applied throughout the data analysis stage in this study.
3.5
Chapter Summary
This chapter reports briefly on the methodology procedures that were applied throughout the research, which includes the research design, data collection procedures and data analysis. This study was designed to implement qualitative
150
approaches for data collection procedures, which consist of two different sources of information, namely primary and secondary data. Primary data derived from few session of interviews and two sessions of FGD using AI approach. Secondary data however were gathered from formal documents related to the study, such as government reports, annual industry reports, and press releases and as well as relevant documents. Such a combination of using different data collection methods represents the implementation of data triangulation, which means involving the use of a variety of data sources in a study. As it was mentioned before, the application of qualitative method, using the AI approach has not been widely used in tourism research. An Appreciative Inquiry approach was applied through FGDs and interviews to examine the potentials and contributions of tourism development at SSAF towards local communities, tourism authorities, and tourism operators. A combination of interviews and focus group discussion in this study were to create a better understanding of the research scenario and to answer the study objectives. The purposes of semi-structured interviews and FGDs through the AI approach were adopted to examine the views and perceptions from local communities, tourism operators and tourism authorities concerning the past, current and future development of SSAF as one of the best eco-tourism destinations in Malaysia. Their views and ideas being the baseline and guide to enhancing performance at SSAF. It is also expected to alleviate failures in developing, planning and maintaining tourism facilities and services at SSAF. This is necessary to conduct this research as to date there are very limited studies that were conducted to evaluate the potentials of rural tourism,
151
particularly in developing countries like Malaysia. The existing challenges faced by the tourism stakeholders in developing and promoting SSAF needs to be thoroughly examined, strategies identified for overcoming the challenges in order to take SSAF to the next level. A repositioned SSAF may contribute to the economy of the tourism stakeholders at Sedim area in particular and Malaysia in general. There are various forms of data management and analysis techniques and tools available in social science. For this purpose, the ATLAS.ti qualitative computer database programme was applied to prepare and analyse the FGD’s and interviews in the analytical program. The application of ATLAS.ti in this study to analyse the data was not because it differed distinctively from the other existing qualitative research software programs, but because of its offers, a variety of tools for accomplishing the tasks associated with any systematic approach to unstructured data, e.g. data that cannot be meaningfully analysed by formal, statistical approaches. The process of designing a qualitative study emerges during inquiry, but it generally follows the pattern of scientific research. The inquirer asks several open-ended research questions, gathers multiple forms of data to answer the questions and make sense of the data by grouping information into codes, themes, or categories. Ethical decisions are threaded throughout the study to ensure the quality of the research.
152
CHAPTER 4
INTERPRETATION OF DATA AND DISCUSSION
4.1
Introduction
The previous chapter provided the methodology applied in the current study to evaluate the prospects and future development of rural tourism at SSAF. In this, chapter, the focus groups and interview results and discussions present a more in-depth evaluation of stakeholder perceptions of tourism development and strategies to create a better condition of SSAF. A qualitative approach was applied through FGD and interviews with 59 participants within five months of data collection. The first section presents the interpretation and finding from focus groups as well as interview sessions, which consists of profile of participants. This is to demonstrate validity, provide understanding of the range of participants, and allow appropriate comparison within tourism stakeholders involved. This section divided into few subtopic to answer all research questions and objectives; (i) strengths and contributions, (ii) potentials and opportunities, (iii) tourism impact, and (iv) stakeholders’ support on tourism development. The second section presents the discussion from the findings where all results are evaluated by looking at relationships among tourism stakeholders involved in SSAF. As part of this, the key stakeholders’ dreams about tourism development at SSAF are also discussed. The chapter concludes by expressing the research findings to the innovation strategies and recommendation.
153
4.2
Description of Participants
We present the findings in the order using rich and descriptive data taken from the participants’ involvement in the discovery and dream stages of the AI 4D-Cycle. We used the qualitative practice of emendation in several quotations to increase readability, yet maintain the specific intent and meaning of the speaker. We refer to the participants as Local Communities (LC), Local Authorities (LA), Tourism Operators (TO) and Visitors (VS) throughout the presentation of findings.
4.2.1 Demographic Profile of Participants
The study involved four stakeholder groups with each group being represented by different number of participants (see Figure 4.1); Local Communities (LC, n=16) and Youth Group (YG, n=19), Tourism Operators (TO, n=7), Local Authorities (LA, n=5) and Visitors (VS, n=12). The total number of participants in this study were N= 59 with different profiles and interests.
Visitors 17.5%
Youth Group 33.3%
Tourism Operators 12.3%
Local Authorities 8.8%
Local Community
Local communities 28.1% Youth generation Local Authorities
Tourism Operators
Visitor
Figure 4.1: Groups of participants in the study 154
Findings of demographic variables were used to determine whether some criteria, which were established for participants’ selection, had been achieved. Gender in the sample was not balanced with 83% male and 17% female participants. Youth groups were represented by a full number of male participants compared to that the local communities group because most of the young generation involved in tourism activities at SSAF is dominated by male generations. Table 4.1 indicates the findings from demographic profile of participants that involved in this study. Table 4.1: Frequency Distributions of Participants’ Demographic Profile N
(%)
Gender
N
(%)
Master Degree Degree Diploma/Certificate SPM/STPM Primary school Secondary school
4 13 4 26 8 4
6.8% 22% 6.8% 44% 13.6% 6.8%
Total Employment
59
100%
Government Farmer Operator Guide/ Instructor Business person Student Housewife Private
9 15 8 5 11 7 1 3
15.3% 25.4% 13.6% 8.5% 18.6% 11.8% 1.7% 5.1%
Total
59
100%
Level education
Male Female
49 10
83% 17%
Total
59
100%
< 20 20- 30 31- 40 41-50 >50
3 23 10 17 6
5% 39% 17% 28.8% 10.2%
Total Nationality Malaysian International
59
100%
56 3
95% 5%
Total
59
100%
Age
The sample consisted of individuals with age groups ranging from below 20 years old 5%, followed by 20-30 years old 39%, 31-40 years old, 41-50 years old and more than 50 years old group at 17%, 28.8% and 10.2% respectively. The educational 155
backgrounds ranged from low-level education (primary school) to master degree holders. The most participants had low-levels of education being more than 50%, degree holders only 22%, whereas only 6.8% had higher-level education (Master degree) but from diverse working experiences. The detailed information of participants that were involved in this study is shown in Appendix C1.
4.3
The Finding from the Discovery Phase
There are many similar key ideas that emerged in this study at each group of participants about the significance of tourism development at SSAF from the discovery phase of the AI process. Although some of the previous studies on the AI approach focused on the participants’ attention on their created chart paper documents, however the study believed that through in-depth discussion with participants, it may encourage them to share and speak honestly (Raymond & Hall, 2008b). In this section, the results of the first phase of the AI approach illustrated (through FGD’s with local communities and youth group as well as personal interviews with tourism operators, local authorities and visitors) are presented. The findings of this study are discussed based on the research objectives that were highlighted in Chapter 1.
4.3.1 Strengths and contributions of tourism development at SSAF
Rural development is acknowledged as an important component that contributes to the economic development of a country. In Malaysia, until recently, much attention was given by the government to ensure the success of the development. Therefore, this study aims to explore the strengths and contributions of rural tourism development at 156
SSAF, specifically using the AI approach. The main reason of using AI approach in this study because it was developed to gain and build enduring relationships between communities and the tourism industry based on the simple assumption that every organisation or community has something that works well and those strengths can be the starting point for creating positive change (Cooperrider et al., 2008). Thus, the application of AI approach in this study revealed some of the important elements about the strengths and contributions of SSAF as one of the best eco-tourism destinations in Malaysia. Focus group discussions and the interviews sessions clearly indicated few important elements in determining the strengths and contributions of SSAF. The results from both collections revealed the following five conditions/factors are the most strengths for the SSAF to be developed and promoted internationally; 1)
Key theme finding: Nature attractions and Tree Top Walks
2)
Others
themes:
Eco-tourism
activities,
Agro-tourism
products,
and
Cultural/history elements. The summary of the result can be seen in Table 4.2 and followed by the detail explanation of each theme.
157
Table 4.2: Summary of Findings for Strengths and Contributions of SSAF* GROUPS OF PARTICIPANTS LC and YG (FGD)
Key Themes
Others themes
LA (INTERVIEWS)
Nature/ environment - Waterfall, forest, flora and fauna, protected tress, herbs and bonsai
TTW - The longest TTW in the world
Cultural and heritage - History of village, cultural of local people, welcoming people, unique name of Sedim Eco-tourism - White water rafting, kayak, jungle trekking, mountain climbing Agro tourism - Fruit plant (mangosteen, durian), fresh water fish
Eco-tourism - White water rafting, kayak, jungle trekking, mountain climbing Nature/ environment - Waterfall, forest, flora and fauna, mountain Agro tourism - Fruit plant
* The full results of this finding can be seen in Appendix C2.1
158
TO (INTERVIEWS)
VS (INTERVIEWS)
Nature/ environment - Waterfall, forest, flora and fauna, mountain (Inas and Bintang), protected animal TTW - The longest TTW in the world
Nature/ environment - Waterfall, forest, flora and fauna
Eco-tourism - White water rafting, kayak, jungle trekking, mountain climbing
Eco-tourism - White water rafting, kayak, jungle trekking, Agro tourism - Fruit plant
TTW - The longest TTW in the world
KEY STRENGTH THEMES: 1.
Nature characteristics
Generally, SSAF is home to natural items of special importance for dendrology, located at compartment 15 within Gunung Inas Rainforest in the Kulim District. The 36, 979 hectare forest was gazetted as a Permanent Forest Reserve on 5th Nov 1937 and it has a rich combination of tourism endowments, such as a forest recreational park, waterfalls, mountains, and protection for conservation and preservation that contains two natural areas; Gunung Inas and Gunung Bintang (LC 5 and TO 3). People in search of recreational and entertainment opportunities offered by SSAF area prove an inadequate attitude and jeopardise the local flora, fauna and habitat that caused the area to be declared under protection. “SSAF is reserved for scientific research but also open for educational visits and research” and “it was declared as a natural protected area which consists of hundreds of herbs and protected trees such as Meranti Seraya, Meranti Tembaga, Meranti Melantai, Keledang and Tongkat Ali” (LC 1) “SSAF also rich with such endowment and pure natural resources, which consists of more than 100 species of herbs that have been used by Universiti Putra Malaysia for medical treatment and medicines”(TO 3)
SSAF is also regarded as one of the important forest areas of the Kedah state and it will be declared as a Natural State Reserve (Hutan Lipur Negeri) by Kedah Forestry Department in few years (LA 2). “Visitors also get opportunities to enjoy the spectacular sight of nature with wide range of some 160 species of birds and more than 50 types of animals” (TO 4)
Another interesting story about SSAF is they also have the oldest tree, more than hundred years old tree called Tualang, which can be found with only 5-minute walk 159
into the forest. With this tree, it has been used as one of the main nature products for tourists’ attraction at SSAF (LC 5, 4 and YG 6, 8, 11). Similarly, one of the TO’s participants also agreed, “For me, the most part of SSAF is about the nature that was rewarded. Although it is same with other places in Malaysia, but the forest in SSAF is very unique and special with varieties of products and resources available that can be used as tourism activities” (TO 5) In addition to this, youth groups also recognised the special element of SSAF in terms of nature; “only specific group likes us that know and appreciate the existing of this forest (SSAF), others may be see it as normal forest as others”. Thus, they desired more relevant development to help them to learn life skills and put them in situations where they will get to help make the decisions and then live with the consequences. 2.
The development of Tree Top Walk
SSAF have great potential to be developed as the best eco-tourism site in region, which may offer visitors the opportunity to get closer to the nature and flora fauna. As was mentioned before, the World’s Longest Tree Top Walk (TTW) is 925m long and 50m high, is among the best attractions at SSAF and offers great aerial views of the natural forest. Although SSAF has a great asset like TTW, it is somewhat surprising that most of local communities did not support the TTW as the main strength of SSAF. They were proud to have TTW in their area, which was acknowledged as international attractions. However, they claimed that TTW is not the main attraction as most of tourists come to SSAF because of the nature and activities offered.
160
Contradicting the groups of local authorities and tourism operators, who claimed, “TTW can be considered as the main attraction of SSAF supported by other tourism products such as nature and eco-tourism activities”. This discrepancy could be attributed to their perceptions that; “To promote and market SSAF either domestic or internationally, the main components of SSAF should be identified, unique and more valuable than other products” (LA 3). It seems possible that these groups of participants were more focused on businessoriented issues, thus TTW were identified as the main attraction at SSAF. Indeed, the idea of a galvanised steel walkaway is one of its kind, suspended in the air it provides safety and thrills to visitors while enjoying the nature walk through the canopy jungle and allowed those whose though it is impossible due to fear of heights, to experience the upper reaches of the rainforest. “With the entrance fee of RM10 for adults and RM6 for children, it is worth enduring the nerve wrecking height among the tress where the structure used for the TTW is built onto the ground” (TO 6). Unlike the canopy at Taman Negara that is built between natural trees, this TTW give visitors more confidence in terms of stability as it is built using huge metals with railings and bolts. OTHER THEMES: 1.
Cultural and Historical assets
One of the more significant findings of the study is that Sedim area actually is rich with many historical assets and products that can be promoted and developed. This
161
theme reflects participants’ thoughts about present and potential future links between tourism and culture in Sedim area. The participants from FGD’s session pointed out: “The history of King Protected House (Rumah Lindungan Raja) at Kampung Sedim was existed in 1934. However, in 1963 YTM Tunku Abdul Rahman has replaced Kampung Sedim to Kampung Lindungan Raja in conjunction with the controlled and protected afforded by the Sedim’s villagers to DYM the late Sultan Abdul Hamid Halim Shah. There was a long story about this village and it is believed that the history will attract numbers of visitors who is interested with cultural and heritage tourism” (LC 1). This was supported by most of the local communities and youth groups from both sessions about the strength of culture and historical assets at Sedim. They believed that although outsiders and local authorities are not aware on these matters, they would maintain and preserve the historical monuments and culture for future generations. The stories of this area can be seen from the existence of Rumah Lindungan Raja at the main gate of Kampung Lindungan Raja, which it was built and protected by the villages itself. Most of the activities conducted by local communities and youth groups will include this element in their program as one of the strategies to promote their history and culture. It is somewhat surprising from the findings when only these groups of people that tried to acknowledge this strength whereas others (such as local authorities and tourism operators) are not aware of the value of this asset. This inconsistency may be due to the different functions and experiences involved of each stakeholders related to SSAF’s activities. Visitors, however, only can know about this product if somebody introduces it to them or brings them to that place. From the information gathered in this study, it was found that the cultural heritage, as well as the historical assets of SSAF and Sedim’s area, were developed and recognised from long time ago. Despite 162
this, local communities felt proud to talk about their valuable assets, such as traditional dances, marhaban and silat performance. Other than that, LC and YG’s group stated that the existence of Rumah Lindungan Raja would be further developed and promoted as one of the most valuable assets for this area. 2.
Eco-tourism activities
The value of SSAF as one of the best eco-tourism destinations in Malaysia can be seen from the pure resources base that they have, such as adventurous waterfall, which was recognised by the International Canoe Federation as being among the best white water rafting challenges internationally. It is also recognised as amongst the fastest flowing waters and rapids, excellent for challenging activities and intends to transform the rapids into one of the outstanding water sports destinations in the region (Kulim District Council, 2013; Tourism Development Council, 2012). Combining the purest of natural resources and challenging waterfall at SSAF, it then boasts varieties of ecotourism products that were offered to tourists, such as kayaking and water rafting. One of the participants in FGD’s group claimed; “SSAF offers various types of eco-tourism activities like bird-watching, education tourism and research centre visits. Adventurous visitors can test their endurance by taking on the rapids with rafting, kayaking, or canoeing while the less daring can opt for soft adventure activities”(LC 5). With more than four tourism operators that offered tourism activities at SSAF, innovative and collaborative activities were promoted and offered to adventurous and mass tourist. “Visitors who come to SSAF usually will love the nature first and then will explore the varieties of tourism resources at SSAF such as waterfall and TTW” (TO 2). 163
“Visitors also will explore and start involved in any activities at available at SSAF after few times visited to SSAF” (TO 7). This also supported with the visitors’ opinion; “We come to SSAF because of the beautiful and challenges of the waterfall, however it is surprising for us when we know that SSAF’s offer lot of eco-tourism activities that very interesting with affordable price” (VS 4, 5, 9). 3.
Agro-tourism products
Another important finding on the strengths of SSAF is called Agro-Tourism products, which is actually a well-established form of tourism. Its emphasizes nature and capitalises on rural culture as a tourism attraction; its primary appeal is not the natural landscape but a cultural landscape (Bhujbal & Joshi, 2012). It is somewhat surprising in this finding where agro-tourism becomes one of the strengths of SSAF because it is does not currently promote any agro-tourism products. This finding further supports the ideas from the FGDs whereby participants stated; “We are impressed to say that one of the reasons of tourist coming to Sedim because of the quality of our agro products such as mangosteens and durian, which was certified by FAMA as the best agro-products in Kedah (LC 7, 9)”. “Most of local people especially from Kulim, Penang, and Sungai Petani will come to Sedim just to buy these fruits and bring back to their town” (LC 10). It was observed that agro-tourism products would bring income to the local people at SSAF, as well as it can be considered as one of tourism attractions besides the business of fruit selling. One unanticipated finding from this study that the existing products is fresh water fish (Ikan Air Tawar), which was managed by one of local people at Sedim. It is a small area that houses catfish, which are kept in many big fishponds. The nature
164
of the business is for breeding and trading these freshwater catfish and is considered a Small Medium Entrepreneur’s project (SMEs). The person that manages this business is also one of operators at SSAF, which offered accommodation and eco-tourism activities. This is the only project that used the waterfall resources to produce the catfish (Ikan tilapia), which can accommodate up to 10,000 catfish at one time. These fish are also traded at the nearby local markets as well as to Chinese restaurants and fish market at Kulim and Penang. In summary, one possible important implication for developing tourism at SSAF is because it may minimise the ecological impact of tourism, which focuses on wilderness adventures as well as flora and fauna as the primary attractions. The importance of tourism products at SSAF can be shown from the interest of tourists in outdoor activities and specialised groups that support the protection of natural areas and generates economic benefits for host communities. Although different groups of participants delivered their ideas in different perceptions, however initial observation from this study shows that they have same visions and missions to SSAF, which is to protect the natural environment while maximising the opportunities that are available at SSAF. It is interesting to highlight those three themes that emerged from this finding, which is similar to all stakeholders’ opinions: nature characteristics, TTW’s development as well as eco-tourism resources. A variety of perspectives was expressed by the participants to share their best stories about SSAF, which were further classified as the strengths and contributions of SSAF. Some groups of participants felt that SSAF have significantly contributed to the nature and environment, whereas others felt that the development of SSAF only contributes
165
to the specific elements such as TTW. However, often-conflicting discourse emerged when discussing about TTW where external stakeholders (LA) only recognised TTW as the main attraction whereas internal stakeholders (LC, TO and VS) were more concentrated on nature and eco-tourism activities as major attractions at SSAF. This was supported by Byrd et al. (2009) who claimed entrepreneurs and government officials did not differ significantly in their perceptions of tourism development. A comparison of these results revealed that SSAF is rich with varieties of resources and products that can be promoted and developed for future tourism potentials.
4.3.2 Potentials and opportunities of tourism development at SSAF
A critical success factor in the tourism industry at SSAF is the potentials and opportunities that will be offered to tourists. In the past, SSAF was able to promote eco-tourism products, such as white water rafting and flora fauna, which caters to the adventure tourists, which lies beyond the nature products and who seeks to embrace a greater visitor experience through the waterfall and Tree Top Walk. The findings of this study indicated that there are obvious direct and indirect potentials and contributions of rural tourism that resulted from an increase in tourism development at SSAF. In this section, participants were asked about; “What are the best ways to develop tourism activities at SSAF? What is the most important contribution of SSAF has made to your life and your community? Based on your experiences, what kinds of opportunities does tourism offer at SSAF? Several factors were identified as the potentials of SSAF to be promoted and developed as one of the rural tourism products
166
in Malaysia as local communities tended to be more accommodative of outside influences brought by an increase in tourism development. Participants were given an opportunity to express their opinions based on their experiences and observations regarding their interactions with tourists and tourism activities at SSAF. It is almost certain that in formulating policies and plans for tourism development at SSAF, it is important to examine the potentials and opportunities that can be major influences on tourism at SSAF. 1)
Key themes: Niche products and infrastructure development
2)
Other themes: Homestay, rural entrepreneurship development, education and research centre, historical and cultural value.
Outlined below are the summary of the potentials and opportunities that were found in this study (Table 4.3) and followed by the detail explanation of each themes.
167
Table 4.3: Summary of Findings for Potentials and Opportunities of SSAF* GROUPS OF PARTICIPANTS LC and YG (FGD)
Key Themes
LA (INTERVIEWS)
TO (INTERVIEWS)
VS (INTERVIEWS)
Niche products
Niche products
Niche products
Infrastructure and facilities development
Home-stay Programme
Infrastructure and facilities development
Rural Entrepreneurship Development
Niche products
Education and Research Centre
Home-stay Programme
Education and Research Centre
Rural Entrepreneurship Development
Rural Entrepreneurship Development
Education and Research Centre
Home-stay Programme
Education and Research Centre
Historical, cultural and architectural value
Rural Entrepreneurship Development
Infrastructure and facilities development
Other themes
* The results of this finding can be seen in Appendix C2.2
168
KEY POTENTIAL THEMES: 1.
Promoting “Niche Products Market”
Through the findings of this study, a number of issues were identified for the potentials and contributions of SSAF. The results (as shown in Table 4.3) show the potential for promoting a “niche products” of SSAF is the main issue that was addressed by all participants. Local communities, as well as tourism operators that involved in tourism industry at SSAF, are always searching for new products that will bring tourists to their area. Natural resources (i.e. waterfall, mountain and flora fauna), culture and heritage (i.e. history of Sedim) as well as the landscape and quality of life, are the types of resources highly valued for SSAF. These resources, coupled with the expansive market trends, open a large market of niche products that can be a source of competitive advantage for rural tourism at SSAF and should be at the heart of its potential. This can bring in far more revenue and provide more jobs than ever-current products could bring (such as water rafting and kayak). Tourism operators can sell their products beyond the local market and therefore have greater market potential for increased sales and profits whereas local communities can get the opportunities for small businesses in their area. It is interesting to note that when a resource at SSAF is valued by the market, it becomes a competitive advantage and in this sense, the successes of tourism development rely on their marketing orientation (ability to anticipate in the market). As one of participants stated; “Although the development of tourism at SSAF requires thoughtful planning and sensitive involvement of the inhabitants of the area, but without the coordination and communication between tourism stakeholders also can cause of failures for tourism development” (LA 4). 169
2.
Infrastructures and facilities development
The potential for SSAF, especially in the context of infrastructures and facilities development are enormous as SSAF, which is not only endowed with rich nature, flora, and fauna but also has a history of a rich culture and heritage. Sedim is not far from the famous town in Kedah, Kulim as well as Butterworth, Penang. However, in spite of its natural gifts, SSAF witnessed poor rates of growth, not only due to violence but also because of poor policy management and lack of infrastructure. Thus, the finding discovered that tourism activities at SSAF would bring needed development to infrastructure and facilities not only for local communities, but also for the benefits of visitors/ tourists. Other than that; “The development of ICT (e.g. telephone, 3G internet connection) can play a major role in enhancing the tourism activities, increasing our productivity besides may provide an opportunity to rural livelihoods and poverty reduction at SSAF” (TO 6, VS 2, 4). Indeed, “it can facilitates access to services and to market information or lower transaction costs of tourism operators and small business” (LC 1, 11, 12 & YG 6, 15) Most of participants also highlighted the importance of public facilities (e.g. toilets, shower room and prayer room) to be developed at SSAF due to limited access to these facilities. They believed if proper facilities can be built and managed, the number of tourists will increase and as a result may encourage the development of rural tourism at SSAF.
170
OTHER POTENTIAL THEMES: 1.
Promoting the “Home-stay Programme”
The core component of the home-stay programme in Malaysia, which differentiates a Malaysian home-stay programme with other home-stay elsewhere in the world, is the element whereby guests “live with” the hosts who are usually introduced as adopted families (Kayat, 2011; Razzaq et al., 2011). This element involves the guest eating, cooking, and doing many activities together with their adopted families, which allow both parties with probably different cultural backgrounds to interact and learn from each other. For that reason, participation in tourism development was identified as one of the factors that have the potential of influencing the socio-economic impacts on tourism. Studies by Nzama (2008) found that the greater the participation of communities in tourism activities, the greater the impact on the tourism landscape and community lifestyle. The results from this study indicated that the majority of local communities at Sedim were actively involved and recognised the indirect economic benefits that occurred from the increased tourism activities. As one of the participant said; “Amongst the activities that offered by local communities at SSAF is home-stay product. However, the constraint existed here because Sedim area is not acknowledge by Tourism Authorities of Kedah as one of the home-stay product in Kedah” (LO 1). “We believed that home-stay product can provide them with advantage and benefit from tourist arrival or events at SSAF especially during peak-season and school holiday” (TO 3, 6).
171
This was supported by Ministry of Tourism Malaysia (2013) that acknowledged the benefits of home-stay program as a vital source of income and employment for local communities, especially in rural areas. In addition to this, participants also highlighted; “Through this programme, tourists will have an opportunities to experience varieties of products offered by local communities at Sedim area such as agro/farm-stay (fruit planting), entrepreneurship development (fresh fish farming), waterfall and eco-tourism activities (white water rafting) as well as cultural products (silat, marhaban and dances)” (LC 1, 4 & YG 1, 5, 7). They also can promote their traditional culture and heritage besides the hosts (local community) will have the opportunities to be part of the tourism product and may receive the socio-economic benefits. 2.
Man-made site of historical, cultural and architectural value
Tourism currently plays the major role not just in the economic elements, but also in cultural and historical conservation. It is also identified as the industry that acts as a catalyst for the conservation of the physical environment and contribute towards the continued economic prosperity for the community (Lane, 2005). Therefore, tourism as the main thrust of the government’s developmental strategy will enable SSAF to expand beyond its present horizons to ensure its position as one of the historical and cultural centres for tourists and may radically transform the livelihood economy. As discussed in previous section, cultural and heritage assets were recognised as one of the strengths at SSAF. However, it is not fully developed and managed by responsible stakeholders, as supported by FGD’s participant arguments;
172
“We have a lot of cultural and history pertaining to the development of this are (Sedim) and we are eager to build it as accordingly” (LC 8, 10). With that matter, the theme called historical value and man-made site emerged to show the potential of developing these products at SSAF according to participants’ acknowledgement. From the observation with local communities, the study believed that if cultural and heritage products at SSAF can be developed, maintained, and marketed, definitely, it will boost the value of tourism industry at SSAF as now they already have various valuable products to be promoted. More importantly, the development of SSAF’s products should imply a proactive approach by all stakeholder partners in order to develop, market, and manage the industry in the most responsible manner to create a competitive advantage. 3.
Rural Entrepreneurship Development (business, craft, skills)
Entrepreneurship is a major driving force behind rural and nature-based tourism. Thus, the role of a tourism entrepreneur is vital for the development of rural tourism (Akrivos, Reklitis & Theodoroyiani, 2014). Rural development is increasingly associated with entrepreneurship, which is considered a central force of economic growth and development (Lordkipanidze et al., 2005; Lordkipanidze, 2002). Tourism’s role in rural development is related to its economic contributions, which can help to sustain and improve the quality of life in SSAF’s communities. With that, the potential for rural entrepreneurship at SSAF was highlighted by FGD’s participants; “What is needed is an environment that enables responsible entrepreneurial development in SSAF such as handicraft and hand-made products” (LC 1, 9 & TO 3). 173
The LA’s participant also asserted; “An important role in encouraging rural entrepreneurship in Sedim area should lie in the hands of local municipalities involving the local communities. This is because the local community knows best what problems and needs are; they control many of the resources such as land, buildings, local products etc.” (LA 3) Apart from the opportunities provided in the informal sector, there are other business opportunities available at SSAF, such as operating providing training for agro-culture, entertainment centre, public transportation to reach SSAF, laundry services, establishing catering facilities where local cuisine is prepared, and others (TO 3, VS 1 & LC 1). In this matter, innovation should be a key means of gaining and maintaining competitive advantage and exploiting the opportunities created by change (Carlisle, Kunc, Jones & Tiffin, 2013; Cosma et al., 2014). Tourism comprises mostly small enterprises and is dependent on innovation for the development of new products. Therefore, entrepreneurs can contribute to the economic and social well-being of the local communities (Saleem & Zain-Ul-Abideen, 2011). Entrepreneurship is a valuable element for rural tourism development and entrepreneurs are usually the first who welcome changes in rural areas. Without entrepreneurs, the exchange and circulation in the economy would be impossible and therefore they have a crucial role in the system forwards or backwards (Surugiu, 2006). The reason of addressing the entrepreneurial cultural in SSAF is related to tourism growth with increased demand for new types of tourism as it is comprised primarily of small enterprises. The important thing for them is to capture the opportunities are gap fillers, the ability to observe the market opportunties and to develop new products or services as well as provide a new source of employment to the economy (Zhao, Ritchie & Echtner, 2011). Small business entrepreneurs need some driving factors in 174
order to operate, such as motivations and some specific conditions for success. However, the most important factor is the enabling environment that provides comfort and support to the entrepreneur (Lordkipanidze, 2002). 4.
Education and Research Centre
The importance of education and research centre, some called it an ‘incubator’, is well acknowledged in the previous studies. It covers a wide range of activities that focused on transferring knowledge through nature resources. A FGD participant mentioned; “SSAF offered lots of natural resources that can be promoted, especially for education purposes likes what UPM have done. They came here and did some research related to herbs and forestry” (LC 1). In addition, tourism operators also agreed; “Several of institutions and organisations and even school came here for motivation’s camp, leadership camp and to build confident amongst the participants” (TO3). The resources that were rewarded to SSAF also become one of the factors for SSAF to be a hub or ‘incubator’ for education and research. Another support also mentioned was, “SSAF is suitable for any kinds of activities, because of the availability of resources here” (YG 1, VS 8 & TO 6, 7). Based on the observations, the study believed that by introducing the education and research centre in SSAF, it will be one of the mechanisms and a key strategy to empower people to take part in rural development and thus may increase the participations of tourism stakeholders. In addition, it will support and uphold the local culture, natural resources, knowledge, and skills as well as to create pride in
175
community values. Therefore, the development of this centre is the foundation for achieving poverty reduction and sustainable development, especially in SSAF’s condition. In summary, from the literature the study believed that the involvement of local communities in tourism activities at SSAF might allow them to share in the benefits of tourism development, whether economic or social. One of the economic advantages of promoting tourism activities in SSAF is that most of the economic benefits of employment and income received directly by the resident who own and/or operate the tourist facilities and services. Some participants from group discussions anticipated that with further tourism development at SSAF, and then more opportunities would be created. There are varieties of products that can be promoted and offered to tourists in relation to home-stay programs, such as silat, marhaban, adventure activities, as well as mountain climbing. The majority of the local communities would like to see more tourism facilities and infrastructure so that more tourists would visit SSAF “…with the existing of home-stay programme here (SSAF), we will have more spirit to support and attract more tourists”. There seemed to be a strong positive relationship between the extent of their involvement in tourism development and their support towards an increase in tourism development. In the changing environment of SSAF and traditional agricultural economies, it is essential to find new means of livelihood and alternatives for tourism operators. Tourism development may stimulate an informal economic belt, who possesses varying skills and creative abilities have the opportunity to earn an income from selling 176
or providing services to tourists. In this matter, the study shows that SSAF’s stakeholders, particularly communities and operators, should become more positive towards the tourism industry. At present, the tourism operators, nature, as well as event organisers are a major feature of SSAF’s tourism whereas fruits vendors and rural based entrepreneurship may offer a relevant alternative. Particularly, it can be defined as ‘environmentally responsible entrepreneurship’ based on resources and experiences offered by nature at SSAF. Table 4.4 shows some of the potential advantages from tourism development in SSAF. Table 4.4: Potential advantages from rural tourism development at SSAF Social advantages - Keeping population locally, as a result there will be decreased migration, good occupational opportunities and educational background for young generations - Improvement of the quality of life - Improved educational level (knowledge about managing business)
Cultural advantages - Strengthening the local cultural and identity through promoting local products/ services - Increase awareness of the value of heritage and need for its protection
-
-
-
-
-
-
Economic advantages An increase in overall employment An increase in employment agro-tourism Diversification of local economic activity Strengthening and expansion of existing and new enterprise An increase in the number of local operators An increase in the number of investors
-
-
-
-
177
Environment advantages Protection and preservation of the rural cultural/ natural heritage Reduction of resources use, minimizing waste and safeguarding environmental qualities thus preserving biodiversity Promotion of sustainable development of tourism products and related business areas Sustainable land management Less environmental impacts due to the small-scale character of rural tourism operators
4.3.3 Impact of Rural Tourism Development at SSAF
The third objective of this study illustrates the perceptions of tourism stakeholders towards rural tourism impact at SSAF. Previous studies were given much attention on the impact of the tourism industry towards local residents as well as tourism stakeholders in general. Tourism impact can be either positive or negative according to the objective as tourists might look at a tourism resource as a thing to buy whereas local community might describe the same thing as part of their life. Indeed, residents with a positive perceived tourism impact are more likely to support additional tourism development and have higher willingness to participate in an exchange with visitors (Chen, 2000). This was also supported by Hong Long (2012) stated that; ‘Tourism should be developed according to the local residents’ need and desired, and it is fundamental to consider the local residents’ perceptions of tourism impacts and their attitudes toward tourism development’. The majority of participants who participated in this study indicated a strong agreement about the positive and negative impacts of tourism development at SSAF. From the perspective of this study, three broad themes about tourism impacts at SSAF emerged from the analysis, namely 1) Key themes: economic and environment impacts 2) Other theme: socio-cultural impacts There was a sense of these impacts amongst participants at SSAF, which it can be shown in Table 4.5; the summary of the finding from the study related to tourism impacts at SSAF.
178
Table 4.5: Summary of Findings for Tourism Impacts of SSAF* GROUPS OF PARTICIPANTS LC and YG (FGD)
Key Themes
Other themes
LA (INTERVIEW)
TO (INTERVIEW)
Economic - Employment growth - Business opportunities - Marketing strategies
Environment - Nature and environment are well preserved and maintained - Tourists exploited the quality of nature due to tourism activities
Economic - Attracts more investments - Employment opportunities - Tourism operators hired local residents for their business
Economic - Increase employment opportunities - The quality of infrastructure is improve with tourism activities
Social and cultural - Enhance cultural exchange - Upgraded local arts and handicrafts - Children and young generation is exploiting with negative attitudes of tourist
Economic - Attracts more tourists - Increase employment opportunities - Tourism operators hired local residents for their business
Social and cultural - Increased the social inequalities among local citizens
Social and cultural - Children and young generation is exploiting with negative attitudes of tourist - Tourists arrival make local residents uncomfortable
Environment - Play important role for historical and traditional buildings restoration - Nature and environment are well preserved and maintained
Social and cultural - Upgraded local arts and handicrafts - Tourists arrival make local residents uncomfortable
Environment - Nature and environment are well preserved and maintained
Environment - Improved public facilities and infrastructures - Local people are welcoming
* The results of this finding can be seen in Appendix C2.3
179
VS (INTERVIEW)
KEY THEMES: 1.
Economic Impacts
Generally, the tourism industry is classified as one of the fastest growing industries worldwide and it may contribute to the extensive economic benefits on both sides, for tourism stakeholders as well as for SSAF. In less developed countries, including Malaysia, tourism activities are regarded as resources that are expected to enhance economic growth. The importance of tourism development at SSAF is reflected in the contribution it makes as an important generator of employment, particularly for local communities. Findings from the study demonstrate that there are broadly similar views among the tourism stakeholders at SSAF. However, some of the local communities and tourism operators highlighted several negative outcomes from tourism development at SSAF, although positive outcomes of tourism are greater than negative outcomes. Recognising that the potential of eco-tourism at SSAF as a new market segment is to increase the livelihood of local residents, measures were undertaken to promote SSAF as a regional centre of eco-tourism excellence. As a result, tourism activities at SSAF do not only offer business opportunities to local residents, rather it can serve as a vehicle for marketing SSAF as the best eco-tourism destination in the world. A common view amongst participants; “The development of eco-tourism activities has many potential benefits for SSAF, which it can be an important source of jobs for local communities especially for those that are economically underdeveloped” (LC 1, 14, TO 1, 3, VS 3 & LA 2, 5).
180
Discussing this issue, an interviewee said; “because jobs in the tourism industry often do not required advance training, local communities with few skills can readily works as tour guide or hospitality worker either full time or part-time job” (LA 2). A variety of perspectives were expressed that the development of rural tourism at SSAF; “Offers an opportunities for income generation and job creation where it can help deliver additional economic activity in addition to replacing traditional rural economic activities” (LC 5, YG 2, TO 6 & VS 4). As one participant supported; “We can sell our agro products to customers such as durians and mangos teen because it was declared by FAMA as the best fruits in state” (LC 9). Whilst a minority of FGD’s participants mentioned that; “The tourism activities at SSAF was providing economic benefits especially to villagers and operators, although the level of this economic benefits varied immensely within the stakeholders” (YG 7). However, the divergent and often conflicting discourses emerged about the distribution of economic benefits, as they highlighted; “Economic benefits of tourism development at SSAF were only flowing to individuals within the areas and not the whole community” (LC 1). In contrary, the perspectives by TO reveal that the benefits of tourism at SSAF flowed to all members of the community, often doing so in the form of a business opportunity and group project. As mentioned by one participant;
181
“We are always calling them (local communities) as part-time workers when there are big group event at our chalet. They are able to receive an income from guiding or other tourist activities such as house keeper for some period of time” (TO 4). However, in a different case of interviews with TO, participants highlighted obstacles related to the economic issues they faced: lack of finances for start-up the business as well as lack of financial support from authorities. This finding was also supported with the FGD session with LC where they revealed; “We have constraints in starting our business although we have land, resources, and ideas because we lack of skills, knowledge, and supports” (LC 10). Nevertheless, they believed that the quality of life for local communities could help to maintain the viability of existing services (i.e. roads, public facilities, etc.) because of the flow of visitors into rural areas and due to this flow, contribute to the overall quality of life of the host population. With consideration for all of these results, the main issue was identified that stakeholders’ perception towards economic impacts of tourism cannot be a factor for underdevelopment of tourism industry at SSAF. 2.
Environmental Impacts
This study attempts to indicate that tourism stakeholders’ perception towards environmental impacts of tourism were positive and create a balance between residents and nature. However, the findings show that there are significant differences of ideas among the stakeholders towards the environmental impacts. According to FGD’s results, greater emphasis was given to eco-tourism activities at SSAF through the preservation of natural and waterfall attractions, as it is a central importance to SSAF’s environment. Some participants expressed the belief that;
182
“Appropriate legislation, a balanced approach to planning and the adoption of the best practice approach to running rural tourism enterprise are essential in order to ensure that the environment is protected especially for long term period” (LC 1, 2, VS 7 & TO 4). In addition, a number of negative issues related to the environmental impacts of tourism at SSAF, which do not appear to be unexpected, also emerged from this finding, such as traffic congestion, noise and water pollution as well as natural environment detriment. Some participants expressed; “Destroy of natural environment”, “Leptospirosis”, “garbage domestic waste” and “monitoring problems were amongst the negative environmental impacts, which are most favoured” (LC 1, 6 & YG 10, 12). The results also supported the ideas from TO where they agreed; “Although tourism activities at SSAF brought a lot of benefits to them, however in some circumstances, there are lots of exploitation and negative impacts came out from tourists as well as irresponsible people” (TO 3). In response to this impact, most of the local communities commented; “Sewage and garbage as well as traffic noise were also other problems caused by visitors and tourism operators at SSAF” (LC 7, 8 & YG 9, 12). These problems not only degraded the quality and beauty of SSAF but also were injurious to the visitors and displeasure to them, thus visitors left with a negative impression and no wishes to make a second visit. Other responses to this issue included; “If tourism is developed in a manner sympathetic to the nature and environment, it may be more supportive of environmental protection than alternative activities, thus may create an environmental-friendly destination” (LA 2, 4).
183
OTHER THEMES: 3.
Social-cultural Impacts
In this section, the findings presented the perceptions of tourism stakeholders towards social-cultural impact of tourism development at SSAF. An interesting finding from the FGD’s of the development of tourism activities at SSAF was the emergence of social independence among local communities, opportunities for leadership and job skills, as well as an increased opportunities for youth in tourism related activities. The outcomes on the youth group also were highlighted, which they expressed that; “Tourism activities at SSAF were identified as being a positive influence on the lives of young people in Sedim area as it offered them the opportunity to remain in the village. Indeed, tourism development at SSAF offered us with full of benefits and we do not have to move out from this village” (YG 1, 12). In this sense, LC also supported that “tourism development particularly in rural area has also been a factor in luring young people away from their village community” (LC 7, 15). The impact of tourism development on the curbing of emigration of young people from the village as this is directly related to the increase in job opportunities for young people that tourism brings. With the development of tourism activities at SSAF, it may support local culture by encouraging restoration of the local historic character of Sedim (The History of Kampung Lindungan Raja) and tourism is generally considered to be a relatively clean industry that may foster local conservation efforts. LC 1 highlighted; “The preservation and restoration of historical sites, buildings and artefacts will be continued as part of efforts to conserve heritage as well as increase the number of tourist attractions in Sedim”
184
Indeed, a number of projects were upgraded as tourist attractions such as ‘The House of Protected King”, as part of efforts to preserve the culture and heritage of Sedim area and meet the special interests of potential tourists. New and existing cultural centres at Sedim also provided opportunities for visitors to enjoy the local cultural features, such as dances, Silat, Kompang, and marhaban. Preservation of culture and traditions in rural areas like Sedim is important for culture and local traditions to visitors as well as plays a significant role in ensuring their long-term preservation. “If we look from a positive perspective we can see many attractions for tourism here (Sedim); culture, nature, tradition, heritage and so on. But if we look from problematic point of view, we cannot see these aspects” (LC 3, 5). One of the findings from the discussion identified the value that tourism development brought to them was the opportunities for communities’ member to interact with tourists from backgrounds very different to their own. They demonstrated that local communities enjoyed the opportunity to broaden their understanding of other people outside their own cultural group. A common view amongst local communities group was that the negative influence of tourism on their communities such as “social destruction, loss on traditional and local culture as well as demonstration effect of the tourist’s lifestyle on the aspirations of young people and the corresponding rise in begging by young people” (LC 10, 13). Communities who confronted and overcame these problems asked to set clear guidelines for tourists and tour agents to follow when coming to their village. Other obstacles or negative influences related to the social issues toward rural development at SSAF are more expressed in rural communities. It is related to the learning process, such as skill level, resistance to change due to the conservative character of the local 185
community, lack of the awareness of the benefits tourism can bring, lack of understanding of tourism in general by authorities, all of which prevent the allocation of resources for tourism development. Overall, the study found that tourism development could provide profitable opportunities to developing SSAF if appropriate preconditions are satisfied that can provide a stimulus to the conservation of biodiversity. It is possible to develop tourism activities at SSAF that is environmentally friendly and relatively sustainable through the excellent coordination and good management among stakeholders.
4.3.4 Stakeholders’ support on tourism development at SSAF
The fourth objective of this study is motivated by the need to take into consideration the stakeholders’ support toward tourism development at SSAF. As previously discussed, tourism stakeholders’ support toward the development of rural tourism are shaping the outcomes of the policies, which are implemented. Tourism stakeholders conceptually are not a narrow framework that includes only local communities, who became hosts and tourists. However, it can include those who are directly and indirectly involved in tourism activities at a place or destination (Kayat, 2002). Meanwhile, community support for tourism and tourism employee behaviours and attitudes affect the way that tourists are treated and their impressions of the community (Waligo et al., 2013) Study of communities’ support toward rural development at SSAF is to understand and evaluate the perception of tourism from tourism stakeholders’ point of view. It is also to have better understanding regarding the involvement of tourism stakeholders 186
in tourism activities at SSAF. Local communities, authorities, tourism operators, as well as visitors are considered as the major players in tourism development at SSAF. Stakeholder perceptions are accepted as crucial for evaluating participatory processes and devising effective strategies for implementing sustainable tourism (Wilson, Fesenmaier, Fesenmaier, & Es, 2001). Generally, based on the finding of this study it is revealed that the social exchange theory used is further supported by a few elements. First, the support for the infrastructure and tourism attraction development, which are perceived benefits and costs, seemed to play an important role in determining a positive response to tourism development. Secondly, support for capacity building where most of participants are willing to do something or unexpected things just to show their interest and awareness within the community. The most striking result to emerge from the finding is that stakeholders’ support for particular tourism developments were depends on their perceptions of their benefits and costs, as implied by the social exchange theory. It is appears to be rather robust when put to test in a variety of conditions and group of participants. In order to evaluate the stakeholders’ support towards tourism development at SSAF, amongst the statements that were asked from participants included: “How do you think you can benefit from tourism?”, “Do you support tourism in your area?” and “How would you like SSAF to be in the future?” 1) Key themes: Community capacity building and attitude & perceptions 2) Other theme: Participation Table 4.6 below shows the summary of findings of the current study whereas the detail explanation will further discuss. 187
Table 4.6: Summary of Findings for Stakeholders’ Attitudes and Support * GROUPS OF PARTICIPANTS LC and YG (FGD) Key Themes
Other themes
LA (INTERVIEW)
TO (INTERVIEW)
VS (INTERVIEW)
Community capacity building - Recreation club - Koperasi Sungai Sedim - English tuition - Informal training - Annual meeting - Community cooperation and coordination program
Attitudes and perceptions - Provide supports - International recognition - More events at SSAF - Responsible body to control
Community capacity building - Koperasi Sedim Bhd - Create awareness and interest amongst youth and child - Mind changes - Training and seminar
Attitudes and perceptions - More infrastructures and facilities will provide - Support the development - Willing to become partner for SSAF’s development
Attitudes and perceptions - More tourist will come - Don’t mind to have more visitors at SSAF - Will support tourism - Give opportunities - Provide fund and budget
Participation - Promotion and marketing - Attract tourists - Planning and managing
Attitudes and perceptions - Environmentally practices - More attention and promotion
Capacity building - Self-promotion - Sharing the ideas and knowledge
Participation - Willingness to participate - Volunteerism - Opportunities for networking
Community capacity building Participation - Community cooperation - Local involvement and coordination program - Supportive - Healthy competition
* The results of this finding can be seen in Appendix C2.4
188
Participation - Support the environment Get in touch with nature
KEY THEMES The finding from FGD with local communities indicated that the majority of the community members at Sedim district supported tourism development at their areas since the decision-making until the implementation level. They believed that tourism activities at SSAF would create positive not only in economic aspects, nevertheless in socio-cultural aspects (LC 1, 4). They are also happy accepting tourists to their area as highlighted by few youth members; “We really hope they (tourists) will come here (SSAF)” (YG 1). “The more tourists come to our area, the greater support we will give to them (YG 6)”. “We really hope more tourists will come here, so that more activities will be created ad offered to them (LC 2)”. It is clear that tourism stakeholders will support tourism activities only when they have an awareness and understanding of its significance. This finding is also consistent with the previous study, which addressed that the local communities should participate in rural tourism development within three level of support, namely: decision-making, implementation or benefit sharing (Hardy & Beeton, 2001). During the interaction with visitors, overall the visitors seem to be truly satisfied with their trip to SSAF. While some of them were in the first visit to SSAF, few others had repeated their visit. One of the most important findings related to visitors’ attitude towards SSAF is “Local community here are very warmth and the natural beauty of the place is really enchanting (VS 1)”. Some of them told that; “We are really enjoyed the waterfall and the nature here…it was a great experience to have water rafting and kayaking here (VS 3, 5,7)”.
189
However, they also hoped that there were more tourists’ facilities and infrastructures will be provided for them so that they will enjoy the hospitality offered at SSAF. It seems that the influence of emotional factors on the visitors’ attitudes toward tourism development at SSAF is powerful as they are more likely to visit SSAF due to emotional factors, such as happy, excited, enjoy rather than rational factors, such as events, and programme. Thus, the study shows that in order to attract more numbers of visitors, tourism operators as well as the local communities need to offer experiential, educating and entertaining programs to encourage them to visit SSAF. It is also important to ensure that an appropriate image and the integrity of the tourism industry are maintained (Kunasekaran & Gill, 2012). A significant number of participants showed their interest in support of their involvement and participation in tourism decision-making in SSAF. One of the prominent strategic planning objectives and policy stipulations of the Rural Tourism Master Plan (2002) is to make tourism sustainable and community driven, which requires that communities should be involved at all levels of decision making. However, the respondents further indicated that; “There are inadequate decision-making processes in SSAF hence they expressed that they were less involved in planning and decision making regarding further development” (LC 1, 5) Although the LA expressed that; “we have given them (local community and tourism operators) full authorities to develop and design SSAF as what they desired as long as they will let us know their plan and budget” (LA 1).
190
However, there still exists inconsistent statements and justification by these groups of participants, thus supporting the suggestion of the need to have an on-going awareness of the balance between people and nature to achieve sustainable tourism (Flanigan, Blackstock & Hunter, 2014). Thus, local communities as destination manager and local authorities as external stakeholder at SSAF need to create a harmonious relationship at the beginning of tourism planning, while ensuring the equality of tourism outcomes Another theme that emerged from this finding is the community capacity building of tourism stakeholders at SSAF. It is interesting to highlight that the statement from LC’s group that mentioned; “We are willing to participate in any kind of tourism activities and planning at SSAF because we want to see more tourists come to our place” (LC1). While YG’s group stated that “the more tourists come here (SSAF), we feel proud and excited. We ready to accept them (tourists) and offer any kind of services and products available here” (YG 1). Indeed, “we have created a club of recreation amongst youth people, English tuition for local people and informal training in rescue and safety process with intention to support this industry here” (YG 7). In particular, the local community also stated that the Koperasi Sungai Sedim were developed to facilitate and support the development of local people indeed it will act as a main body to control and monitor the tourism development and planning (LC 1). There are lot of supportive actions as well as the arguments that were discussed with all participants throughout the sessions. Most of participants, including visitors at SSAF, expressed their positive perceptions and feelings towards the development of SSAF in future. But, the main key is to balance between the facilities development 191
with the nature and flora fauna because these is the valuable assets of SSAF that need to be maintain for future generations. Despite this, through a rigorous study on visitors’ perception in national parks also revealed that it is a strong causal relationship between people’s attitude towards nature and their attitude towards tourism influence their attitudes towards the use of a resource (Xu & Fox, 2014). Therefore, this study confirmed that stakeholders’ attitudes towards tourism development at SSAF are influenced and shaped by how they view nature, thus it is crucial for the future development of SSAF itself. Tourism stakeholders play an important role in tourism development and promotion. Thus, in response to this issue, local communities at Sedim stressed the important roles of local authorities, such as UPEN and Tourism Authorities in several areas. First, enhancing and maintaining of infrastructures necessary for tourism (e.g. roads, public toilets), secondly, zoning and maintenance of the community so that it looks clean and appealing to tourists, thirdly, the education and employment support for businesspersons and other persons working in tourist sectors, and lastly, funding for tourism development and facilities. In that respects, the study showed that social exchange theory proves that some residents, who perceive that if the emergence of tourism in their area leads to development, then they will support tourism. However, if they feel that they do not get anything from tourism development or tourism activities may cause a negative impact, they will definitely neglect tourism as they believe that exchange does not happen (Kayat, 2002; Ling et al., 2011).
192
4.4
The Finding from the Dream Phase
The third stage of the application of AI process in this study is the Dream Phase. It is an invitation for the participants to amplify its positive core by imagining the possibilities for the future that were generated through the Discovery phase. The main ideas of this phase are to encourage them to create images of the future that are compelling and inspiring around their affirmative topics (Cooperrider et al., 2008). Indeed, it gives concrete shape to these dreams and realises future at present. This phase also guided as a tool in order to encourage the participants to share dreams and their strategies to ensure the sustainable tourism development at SSAF. AI does not focus on solving a problem, rather it emphasises more on identifying the best ideas and the core value of SSAF. Thus, by building energy, excitement, and synergy in this phase, participants can begin to envision on SSAF for the future that embodies the images, hopes, dreams and visions of its people. In this section, the study will show the main outcomes from the dream stage (see Figure 4.2 and 4.3), which encompasses the results from different stakeholders (local communities, local authorities, tourism operators, and visitors) in the Dream phase. All the findings from this phrase have been divided into two categories of statements: 1)
Strong dreams: SSAF as “Taman Negeri” & provide more services and facilities
2)
Weak dreams: Business incubator & entrepreneurship centre
The findings may act as a foundation for the positive change agenda for SSAF’s development in future.
193
Strong Dream
Weak Dream
Higlight as "Taman Negeri"
Business incubator
More services and facilities provided
Entrepreneurship center
Figure 4.2: Categories of dream statements from participants Clear statements and images of what the stakeholders’ members want to see at SSAF for the future, which are feasible, motivating, and possible. Creativity is heightened as ideas are enthusiastically expressed and innovation is amplified as voices of hope and possibility diminish defensive and helpless thoughts and behaviours (Cooperrider et al., 2008).
Figure 4.3: Summary of Findings from the Dream Phase 194
4.4.1
Strong Dream Statements by Local Residents
Once we finished the discovery phase with LC (including YG) and TO through FGD’s and interviews’ sessions, we then moved to the next stage called Dream Phase. In this stage, researcher asked the participants to share their desirable future towards SSAF’ development. The study believed that, once they have positive images towards SSAF then they will likely to act positively. We see from the discussion of the vision and mission that positivity and close connection brings to these groups when people come together to create mutually solutions amongst the stakeholders. The detail findings from this stage can be seen in Appendix C3.1 and C3.3. From the finding of this study, it is found that there is one similar dream that came out from this finding, which is highlighted or gazetted as “Taman Negeri” or State Forest. As mentioned before, SSAF is richness with varieties of products as such nature forest, eco-tourism activities, as well as TTW. Thus, most of the participants hope with the declaration of SSAF as one of the “Taman Negeri”, it will enhance and encourage the development of rural tourism at SSAF. It is also important to highlight the significance of communities’ supports and engagements in tourism development as they are play crucial roles in determine the successful of tourism industry. In addition to that, the foundation goal of local communities towards SSAF development is what we called the “Sustainable Rural Tourism Development”, which they want to achieve in their life for the sustainable development. While sufficient facilities, supports, and coordination amongst stakeholders at SSAF become their primary goal because they believed that without the integration of these groups, it is difficult to achieve the desired vision. One of the most desired outcomes from this 195
group is that they want to live in harmony and calm with the nature without any destructions either physical or mental, such as social problems and environmental destroyed. The results, as shown in Figure 4.3 have demonstrated the dreamed vision of local communities towards future development of SSAF. The majority of participants from these groups responded that they want to see a bright future of tourism development at SSAF as it has many resources and products that can be promoted and offered to tourists, both domestic and international. Some participants expressed the belief that; “If we can manage and handle SSAF in our own hands, we would definitely never give chance to outsiders to take over of our asset, SSAF” (LC 1, 8 & YG 6). Other responses to these issues included the important of integration amongst tourism stakeholders at SSAF (authorities, operators, communities, and visitors) to ensure the sustainability of tourism development at SSAF for future generation. A minority of participants (2-5 persons) from these groups indicated negative feelings towards SSAF’s development due to uncomfortable of tourists’ flow and environment destruction. This can be seen from their expressions; “We want to see the development here (SSAF), but we have to face with all challenges and impacts of tourism activities here. If we can integrate and corporate starting from decision making until the development progress, then we will support the development of SSAF” (LC 10). In contrast, one of the weak dream statement from tourism operators was the development of a “business incubator” as one of the contributions of tourism development at SSAF. Identifying the constraints and limitations that prevent local communities and tourism operators with entrepreneurial skills from starting their own business is an important aspect of economic development at Sedim. Previous studies 196
acknowledged the important of a business incubator to ensure the successful of entrepreneurship’s elements among local communities and tourism operators in any rural areas. When asked what will lead to their success in the tourism field, the most common reason given by TO 6 was, “we hope will get support and encouragement from authorities such as training, business centre, as well as financial support”. While, others support with their own opinions and aspirations, such as providing a quality product, uniqueness and variety of products offered. The overall response to this stage was very positive, as they believed that any successful rural tourism development depends on the quality of the products offered, accessibility, and infrastructure of the area as well as the interest of investors (YG 3, 5 & LC14). In most of these aspects, SSAF may be at disadvantage as compared to other eco-tourism areas due to the lack of policy-coordination and low priority provided to SSAF by the central government (LC 11, 12). The developmental reasons to promote SSAF as a growth pole, such as diversification of tourism products and developing niches markets for SSAF to increase the net benefits to tourism stakeholders, particularly for local communities, is to increase their participation in managing tourism products. Thus, ways to achieve the dreamed vision indicated by these groups are needed and implemented. With that, tourism operators also believe that without communities’ involvement, the successful of tourism development cannot be achieved. It was also shown that the sufficient and appropriate of services and facilities provided at SSAF is another dream of this group. As tourism’s operators, they believed that services, and facilities provided for visitors should be carefully planned and managed in order to attract numbers of visitors at SSAF.
197
4.4.2
Strong Dream Statements by Local Authorities and Visitors
Comparing the two results from these groups (local residents and local authorities), it can be seen that there was only one similar dream detected from the discussions. The single most striking observation to emerge from the data comparison was at foundation goal where LA 1 indicated that they intend to provide sufficient facilities and support towards the development of SSAF in the future. However, it depends on the available budget and policy planning at the State level because they believed that understanding of communities’ opportunities and challenges associated with SSAF’s conditions is important for developmental planning. They probably will find ways of developing SSAF’s features and activities to make them tourist-attractive and create positive impacts from tourism activities at SSAF. When the participants were asked about their desired future towards SSAF, the majority indicated the importance of re-branding, re-managing and re-promotion of tourism products at SSAF in terms of activities offered, SSAF’s authentic features, as well as the name of SSAF itself. It needs to be transformed (the way stakeholders imagine about SSAF) to the manner in which image of attraction, culture and SSAF will be used in advertising, and promotions are well presented. One of the respondent commented; “SSAF should re-name, re-branding if we want to market them at international level (LA 1)”, Whereas others indicated that “sufficient facilities, infrastructures and support is important if we want to attract numbers of tourists to SSAF” (LA 4)” Of the five participants, one of them claimed;
198
“If we want to turn SSAF to a new image, promotion and marketing should take at the first place of our developmental planning (LA 3)”. Tourism industry has to be human and adapted to the needs of the visitors, respond to the needs of the local communities, be socio-economic and culturally well planned, and environmentally sound. As the main reason for tourists/visitors to visit rural areas is to experience, or at least view, thus tourism should offer products that are operated in harmony with the local environment, community attitudes and culture so that they become permanent beneficiaries and not the victims of tourism industry. As visitor stated that; “We always support the tourism activities here (SSAF), however we need a proper services, facilities, as well as the security aspects, so that we will feel comfortable” (VS 1). Among the plausible dreams from these groups, it was found that the most striking dream to emerge was the safety and security as well as the sufficient services and facilities offered at SSAF. Thus, to tap the immense dream of this group, coordinated actives of all stakeholders involved in the development are required. Thus, in response to this finding, it shows that key features that make SSAF development relevant are their availability of resources and products combined with the economic opportunities, which may provide a tourism asset. The detailed findings from this stage can be seen in Appendix C3.2 and C3.4. As highlighted in rural tourism concepts, the aims of “rural development” is to increase the net benefits to local people as well as to bring wider benefits to rural areas.
199
4.5
Discussion
In this section, the study presents a discussion about the salient findings as evidenced through data collected during the Discovery and Dream phase of the AI Cycle.
4.5.1 The importance of rural tourism development at SSAF
In order to establish a tourism enterprise, individual, groups, or businesses must learn about tourism and understand certain basic principles. Tourists have many expectations before, during, and even after a tourism experiences. Tourism operators are doomed to failure if they enter the industry without understanding the principles of tourism and the reasons for the existence of the industry (Dogra & Gupta, 2012). Thus, the study believed that, a practical approach towards rural tourism development at SSAF requires a certain amount of study before implementation and understanding about the potentials of tourism products is very crucial. It is important for those who are interested in providing rural tourism services to make a careful evaluation before implementing any businesses or projects. In response to RQ 1, a number of factors combine to make SSAF ideal for tourist visitation and continue to experience tourism. First is that their landscape is better conserved. Road and building construction are not a common occurrence at SSAF; closely linked to this is the perception that the countryside offers a freshness of air and natural environment. This becomes an advantage to the SSAF’s setting when it comes to tourism areas. For tourists who love nature and idyllic scenes, SSAF is the place to escape to from tourism purposes. Rural development at SSAF, which are currently
200
very few, lack the necessary means but can be achieved by making a number of investments, such as an adequate parking systems as well as public facilities and services. By such investments, SSAF commune could be significantly increase its touristic function. There should be strategies to promote and enhance the development of tourism activities at SSAF either for long-term or short-term strategies. Another possible finding is that local communities at SSAF have unused lands as well as underutilised space to be developed or managed. These “dead” assets actually can easily be turned into business or profit-making products, such as home-stay, farm-stay, and Extreme Park. What is important here is the innovation and creative thinking by local communities in managing and developing their assets (Pratt & Rivera, 2011). These benefits also may include diversification of the local industry base, such as craft and increased employment to have a better life style. Economically, this strategy may create better job opportunities, a potential for small business, as well as to have a higher earning income (Mensah, 2012). From environmentally aspects, the study found that the more sensitive tourism stakeholders were towards environment conservation, the more sustainability could be created at SSAF. Besides, the development of a home-stay product at Sedim area may contribute in a smooth flow of income for the host community. During the survey, it is found that the local community at Sedim area was very helpful, welcoming and always positive towards tourism activities in their village. Proper training and skills, i.e. visitor handling, communication skills and being technology oriented should be provided to enhance and update local communities’ knowledge and skills when they are involved in a home-stay programme. Indeed, a recent study by Bel et al. (2015) also asserted
201
that there is a need to determine which combinations of rural amenities, local products and tourist services should be promoted to strengthen the development of niche markets in rural tourism. They believed rural development should be built according to the concept of sustainable tourism and that the local community should be trained to manage the tourism products, all by its own, through goal setting exercises, in the maintenance of the area, as well as effective monitoring of all the tourism activities. The local authorities/government can create policies that encourage entrepreneurial behaviour, which means that within a generation, a society or community of people can become more or less entrepreneurial. There should be greater training on various aspects related to tourism services, such as guide training, hospitality management, which may encourage young generations and unemployed people to come forward and start working in this sector. There is a strong connection between the culture of a people and its tendency to be entrepreneurial (Hawkes & Robert, 2006). Understanding the cultural and social basis of a particular community like SSAF can provide an appropriate starting point for building a more entrepreneurial society and economy. Many countries are seeking to increase their entrepreneurial vitality through the high business start-up and exit rates in order to contribute to economic growth and development (Heilbrunn, 2010). The role of the government in stimulating and creating an appropriate environment in SSAF level to address the supply side of entrepreneurship, is important, focusing on people who have the motivation, the finances and the skills to start new business. Moreover, efforts should be made on creating a culture that promotes entrepreneurship throughout society and develop a capacity within the population to recognise and 202
pursue opportunity (Zampetakis & Kanelakis, 2010). Policies and programmes should be targeted specifically at the entrepreneurial sector in order to increase the overall education level of the population, ensuring that entrepreneurial training is readily accessible to develop skills and capabilities to start business and to facilitate the startups by influencing the supply of potential entrepreneurs (Kirschenhofer & Lechner, 2012). However, conflicts between outside tourism developers and residents should be overcome through planning processes that allow communities to create a set of public values for their community. Rather than something to fear as detrimental to tourism, community-based action and initial resistance to tourism development holds promise for a community that cares about its future and will invest in specific kinds of tourism development (Bramwell & Lane, 2012; Cosma et al., 2014).
4.5.2 The impacts of rural tourism development at SSAF
Prior studies that have noted the significance impacts of tourism development and the findings of this study has important implications about the impacts of tourism development at SSAF, which likely is similar with previous studies. Overall, this study found that the most important relevant finding was tourism activities could be addressed as one of the driving forces for SSAF to be one of the best eco-tourism spots in Malaysia. These findings are consistent with those of other studies that revealed some important tourism impacts toward tourism stakeholders, such as increased residents’ pride, improved quality of products and services of tourism infrastructure, improved residents’ overall quality of life etc. A considerable amount of literature also
203
discussed the negative impacts of the tourism industry; social problems suffered by living in a tourism destination area (e.g. crime, drug, and robbery), significant traffic congestion, solid waste accumulation and air pollution as well as other negative impacts on the natural resources. Some empirical results obtained by this study are not new; however, all the findings confirm the reality of some tourism impacts in SSAF that are significantly associated with previous research. The most striking result to emerge from the finding is that tourism development at SSAF has certainly helped tourism stakeholders to promote local products (e.g. handicraft and traditional foods), eco-tourism activities (e.g. water rafting, jungle trekking) as well as the Tree Top Walk. It has provided a means of demonstrating to visitors the special characteristics that distinguish SSAF from other destinations. The tourism products at SSAF can be enhanced by an additional value of cultural and heritage dimensions. Other than that, tourism development at SSAF is a means of reinforcing awareness and respects that aimed at sensitising the local community about the tourism industry. Public attitudes to tourism will become more positive as the local community perceives that their interests, both economic and social, are being served rather than exploited by tourism. This awareness reinforces a strong sense of pride in the local community for things that belong to SSAF, and thus cultivates a healthy attitude towards the development of the industry. In response to RQ 2, the finding indicated that one of the most important objectives of rural tourism development at SSAF is to increase the income flow of tourism stakeholders as well as improving the quality of their life. It can be found that there is harmony between local communities and tourism operators’ perception towards
204
tourism impacts on tourism stakeholders at SSAF. Thus, it can be seen that the perception towards tourism impact on tourism stakeholders at SSAF may support community capacity building for tourism development. This is because they believed the importance of economic distribution among people at Sedim and the lack of understanding of tourism impacts can be a factor for underdevelopment of tourism in their village. The study showed that the main goal of rural tourism development at SSAF is to create a community managed rural tourism model through strengthening livelihoods of the local communities and the preservation and development of local heritage of the villages. This finding is in agreement with Deery, Jago and Fredline (2012) suggestions that the government, as well as other agencies related to tourism industry, should understand how individuals within a host community perceives the benefits and disadvantages of tourism because of the potential hostile response to tourists if a balance is not achieved. It is extremely important for government entities at all levels so that action can be undertaken to reduce the likelihood of a community backlash against tourists and tourism development. It is interesting also to note that due to the initiatives taken by the UPEN and Tourism Malaysia to promote SSAF, a number of avenues for employment of local communities opened. Indeed, the employment of local youths as tour guides provided gainful employment to a large number of unemployed youth at Sedim. One of the issues that emerged from this finding is the existence of a large number of shops; small restaurants, etc. started functioning due to the increase in number of tourists, which has again improved the socio-economic conditions of the local communities.
205
Further analysis also showed that one of the biggest challenges of rural tourism at SSAF is that tourism success should not destroy what attracts the visitors in the first place, i.e. the environment and nature. Disposal of plastics, reuse, and recycling of plastics, awareness across generations are amongst the challenges faced by tourism industry in SSAF. During the field visit to SSAF, it was observed that there is change in visitors’ as well as the residents’ attitudes towards cleanliness, hygiene and sensitiveness towards the environment. The participation of local community members for improvement of sanitation conditions is limited and the lack of the concept of improved sanitation conditions in the village can increase length of stay period of tourists, which would ultimately lead to enhancement of income generation. The findings also offer an important issue towards tourism development at SSAF in the context of creating awareness among tourism stakeholders besides providing general knowledge on the opportunities created from the tourism industry at SSAF. Local communities perceiving tourism as a cause of increase of the level of employment for them and having created better environment in the context of public facilities and services will support tourism development at SSAF. In particular, the study found that tourism stakeholders would not support the development of the tourism industry at SSAF without a direct economic, social, and environmental benefits. They prefer to maintain the current conditions of SSAF, instead of distributing the tourism flows and causing undesirable effects on local’s habits. It can therefore be assumed that tourism development at SSAF contributed significantly to the benefits and opportunities for tourism stakeholders in general and local residents in particular.
206
4.5.3 Tourism stakeholders’ support for sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF
Tourism was acknowledged as a powerful tool to stimulate other sectors and it plays a vital role in the process of integration through its potential for inter-industry linkages. In the past, there was a failure to maximise the tremendous benefits of SSAF, which resulted in considerable leakage of local resources and livelihood. In the process of sustainably developing tourism in SSAF, efforts must be made to increase the involvement of local communities in the planning process and facilitate their investment in its growth and development. Thus, future tourism development at SSAF should have fullest participation that can engendered among all sectors and classes in the society. This was also supported by previous studies that claimed the crucial role of tourism stakeholders in tourism development, planning and implementation (e.g; Muhammad et al., 2012; Plummer & Taylor, 2004; Razzaq et al., 2011; Waligo et al., 2013). Most of the participants from this study support for future tourism development, they put greater emphasis to see more tourism activities, and products will be developed at SSAF because they feel the need to have new tourism facilities and infrastructures in their area. Indeed, they indicated that tourism activities are one of the most important industries, playing a major economic role for the Sedim area in addition to the agro and farm industry. What is surprising is that local authorities and tourism operators promised that they would help the community to grow in the right decision, which makes them happy and proud to see tourists coming in, and makes them feels that
207
tourism significantly holds great promise for SSAF’s future as well as makes them remain in support tourism development. Based on the field work study and interviews with participants, it is believed that there are four different groups of participants in relation to the support and participation in tourism activities at SSAF, namely; high-participants, high-moderate participants, low-moderate participants and low participants, as supported by Byrd and Gustke (2011). Table 4.7 shows the different groups of participants related to tourism activities at SSAF. Table 4.7: Different types of participations related to tourism activities Types of participants High-participants
High-moderate participants
Low-moderate participants
Low-participants
Stakeholders’ participation Government officials or Local Authorities that are active in tourism related activities, familiar at some level of tourism opportunities and issues as well as involved in some way in most major decisions related to sustainable tourism development at SSAF Business owners or Tourism Operators; perceived tourism as having a positive impact on the community, sees many of the economic benefits and having positive perceptions of tourism. They are influencial in many of the policies that are developed related to tourism. Residents or Local Community that did not participate in many natural resources based activities but perceived tourism’s impact on the community is positive. This group should be encouraged to participate in tourism related activities as this groups are extremenly important to the sustainable tourism process and the success of tourism policies. Visitors,which are limited to the influence on policy development but extremely influential in the success of any sustainable tourism process. Thus, it is important to obtain their concerns and wants and account for tourism development process.
208
For those matters, it is interesting to note that in any situations of tourism development at SSAF, it would bring benefits and values to rural dwellers if they can contribute from the beginning of the tourism planning. The responses received are aligned with the assumption that when the stakeholders’ perceptions on tourism impact increases, their life satisfaction with various life conditions also will increase and that this effect finally influences their overall life satisfaction (Latkova & Vogt, 2011). This scenario also shows the relationship between perceived tourism impacts and residents attitudes towards tourism development at SSAF. A strong relationship between these elements were reported in the literature (e.g. Coulson et al., 2014; Kayat, 2002; McGehee & Andereck, 2004), whose indicated that local residents perceived tourism development may bring more economic, social and environment benefits to them, such as providing job opportunities, natural preservation as well as improving local economics. In response to RQ 3, the findings confirmed that social exchange theory was the appropriate tool to be applied in order to evaluate the level of tourism stakeholders’ attitudes and support for tourism development at SSAF. The findings of this study shows that tourism stakeholders will feel empowered in tourism development if tourism policies ensure opportunities for representation to all members of the community at SSAF. Indeed, they also will involve in the exchange in tourism development if they can gained benefits without incurring unacceptable cost and vice versa. The study believed that local authorities should ensure that local community will have chance to participate in tourism development, thus tourism planning and policies should prohibit community exploitation by external tourism agents. They also should pay more attention to the local community by incorporating them into the
209
planning process and the resulting empowerment could make them more support to the tourism development in the future (Ling et al., 2011). In summary, to include all relevant stakeholders or even crucial stakeholders may be difficult or impossible to accomplish. In reality, certain stakeholders will participate whereas others will not participate in the planning process. However, if planners can identify which stakeholder groups in the community are and are not actively participating in the process, the planners can at least make attempts to identify some of the non-participants’ concerns about the development (Byrd & Gustke, 2011). Thus, the findings in this study provides a development framework for encouraging stakeholders’ support toward rural tourism development specifically in SSAF’s condition and generally in Malaysian setting (see Figure 4.3). According to this framework, the factors that contribute to the supportive residents are family involvement, social status, as well as level of education. It is believed that persons, who come from supportive environments are more likely to support tourism development than others (Lordkipanidze et al., 2005). Therefore, understanding the cultural and social basis, especially for SSAF’s stakeholders, may provide an appropriate starting point for building a supportive society and environment.
210
Figure 4.4: Framework for encouraging stakeholders’ support. Source: Lordkipanidze et al. (2005) 4.5.4 Application of the AI approach toward sustainable tourism development
Prior studies noted the applicability of the AI approach to meet the objectives of this study. Answering the last research question in this study was accomplished through application of qualitative data using the AI approach as the main instrument in determining the prospective and future contributions of rural tourism development at SSAF. This study was conducted to achieve its objectives, which are to examine the strengths, potential, impact, and the stakeholders’ support towards tourism development. Therefore, a focus group and in-depth interviews were flexible methods to discover the prospect of tourism development and to understand the meanings behind why SSAF’s stakeholders feel the way they do towards tourism development.
211
It is believed that if the study began with a quantitative technique, information would be limited to the questions asked and in the form in which they were asked. Applying the AI approach throughout the session enables researchers to be close to participants because AI was proven as a powerful approach in empowering/ transforming communities, programmes and/or organisations (Stratton-Berkessel, 2010). Using this method, people discover “best practices” and “success stories” of what happened, how and why. From that reality, participants develop a shared visions based on replicating the lessons of success. The process of the AI approach, with its emphasis on the positive had a profoundly empowering effect upon the majority of people who took part in the change initiative. Indeed, a fundamental principle in AI is that of the positive principle, that is asking positive questions leading to positive change (Thatchenkery, Avital & Cooperrider, 2010). This study believed that the application of the AI approach for rural tourism development provided an opportunity for researchers to reflect upon and become engaged in a positive discussion about what they know around, what works for them, and what they can do to help create more sustainable tourism developments at SSAF. It also provided great engagement opportunities for communities to become involved in managing and developing the tourism products at SSAF. Involving participants in the AI process provided opportunities for meaningful participation and contributed to the process of change as participants listen to the positive experiences and stories of their friends. AI compiled a collection of inspiring stories that provided data on what people do not know about SSAF and this information may be “news” to most people because its 212
strength originated from the people in the system who knows that it is true. Indeed, one of the most important things that were learned from the AI approach is that human systems grow in the direction of what they persistently ask questions about. This finding further supports the idea of Cooperrider and Whitney (2005) that highlighted that propensity is strongest and most sustainable when the means and ends of inquiry are positively correlated. Therefore, commitments to on-going support for tourism stakeholders were made to help their dreams become reality. Continuous improvement and renewed focus on rural development as the core purpose will not be sustained without time, a continued commitment to ongoing dialogue and adequate resources. There are several characteristics underpinning the AI approach. Firstly, the application of AI in planning and managing conservation and development programs and activities in the tourism field is to provide an additional approach that helps motivate people to plan and manage a collective vision of the best possible future (Koster & Lemelin, 2009; The Mountain Institute, 2000). Secondly, inviting people to participate in dialogues and share stories about their past and present achievements, assets, unexplored potentials, innovations, strengths, opportunities, benchmarks, high-point moments, core and distinctive competencies, expressions of wisdom and possible futures can be identified as “positive core” in the AI approach (Nyaupane and Poudel, 2011). Questions, such as “What do you value most about your community/village? What are some of the best things about living here/your village?”, “What is it about SSAF that you value most?”, and “What are the uniqueness or main attraction of SSAF as compare to other places?” allowed participants to reflect on what works most
213
effectively for tourism development and initiates a discourse about how to move in that direction. This can be seen where most of the participants leave the discussion energised and armed with action plans to develop SSAF and are eager to begin to put into practice. Despite the development of rural activities at SSAF may result in enhancing the livelihood of local people as well as possibly increasing in the number of visitors to SSAF. This situation could be implemented by improving the bottom-up actions through community-based approaches action and through appropriate combinations of eco-tourism and agro-tourism activities at SSAF. Therefore, there is a need to coordinate efforts to place SSAF on the map as a high quality area to visit and for business purposes. The finding also has important implications for maintenance of the facilities offered because it is an aspect that requires a lot of attention. Otherwise, the utilities and building structures either would be destroyed due to sheer negligence or would not be able to draw the desired number of tourists. Based on the observations at SSAF, it was found that the tourism asset such as the tourist information centre are not well maintained, although the main function of this asset serves an important element for tourism development at SSAF. For maintaining this asset, it should involve the young generations as cleaners, guards, facilitators, or receptionists. Therefore, not only are the structures utilised and maintained, the local community will get gainful employment resulting in self-sustainability. As discussed in the previous chapter, AI seeks to uncover and stimulate new ideas from stakeholders in the system, which the ideas that will, at least be new in their status within the system. All stakeholders participated in gathering and making sense of the
214
ideas and views of other stakeholders and participated as theorists, dreamers, and designers. However, Bushe (2011) argues that a lack of attention to the generative potential of questions used in AI processes may explain why some interventions succeed and some fail. A common concern is with the possibility that a focus on positive stories and experiences during the discovery phase will invalidate the negative community experiences and repress potentially important and meaningful conversations that need to take place (Cooperrider et al., 2008; Cooperrider & Whitney, 2005). Therefore, they indicated that it is important to take into consideration in all position of AI processes in order to create a better environment and conditions. In summary, the AI approach is regarded as a philosophy, not a technique that is only to be implemented. However, there are some benefits of appreciative approaches that were found from this study. Primarily is that AI unlocks the endless potential of human thinking and, in doing so, ultimately contributes to converting problems into opportunities and transforming conflict into peace making. Indeed, when sharing positive stories with other people or friends, they will gain confidence in their ability to deliver because these are their experiences by themselves, not someone else’s best practice. People like talking about their successes and they will definitely engage in discussions that focus on what works rather than what does not work. AI also provides an energising framework for conducting virtually any type of meeting/workshop on any subject. It is flexible, easy, and replicable and can be used quickly in any community, organisational development, or conflict-related activities. It also generates a positive image of the future that influences people’s behaviour in the present, and that acts to bring about the anticipated positive result.
215
4.5.5 S.W.O.T + Appreciative Inquiry = S.O.A.R Analysis
The traditional approach of analysis starts with S.W.O.T (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) to evaluate any kind of situation or condition. However, recent analysis emerged from an interesting approach together with the core principle of AI, called S.O.A.R (Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations, and Results) (KhavarianGarmsir & Zare, 2014). This model provides a flexible approach to strategic thinking, planning and leading that invites the whole system into strategic planning by including all those with a stake in the success of the organisation’s future (Khavarian-Garmsir & Zare, 2014; Stavros & Cole, 2013). In order to understand the rural development at SSAF using the AI approach, the S.O.A.R analysis was performed based on the interviews and literature. Stories of success, opportunities available, aspirations for the future as well as results available are needed to attain our aspirations (Stavros & Hinrichs, 2007). They also highlighted that, although S.O.A.R is considered a relatively new concept among the practitioners, scholarly research agendas and basic and applied research using S.O.A.R is increasing. Thus, this study took the assumption that S.O.A.R might assist in the strategic assessment process, starting with an inquiry to discover how the SSAF will be developed in future. Generally, we are familiar with S.W.O.T analysis when we attempt to explore any conditions/situations. However, after learning about and implementing AI, this study found the significance of the S.O.A.R analysis in this study. Indeed, by applying the S.O.A.R analysis, none of the weaknesses and threats were highlighted and discussed. It is strictly positive, provides an overview of the current rural development and revealed insights for developing possible policies at SSAF. The S.O.A.R analysis has 216
a qualitative nature, which helps one to discover information about values and resources a SSAF possesses. The results of the S.O.A.R analysis of SSAF development are presented in Table 4.8. Table 4.8: S.O. A. R analysis of tourism development at SSAF
STRENGTHS S T R A T E G I C I N Q U I R Y
1. 2. 3.
4.
5. 6.
OPPORTUNITIES
Having the World Longest Tree Top Walk Rich with historical story and heritage Purely resources based such as adventurous waterfall for white water rafting Good eco-tourism based and increased demand for the product Diversify of natural and cultural resources Safety and security procedures provided in all activities
ASPIRATIONS A P P R E C I A T I V E I N Q U I R Y
1. 2.
3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
1.
2. 3.
4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Rural characteristic of SSAF favourable for eco-tourism and entrepreneurship development Economic growth Give opportunity to promote SSAF for new business establishments Employment opportunities Strengthening and improving local identities and culture Niche market opportunities Development of innovation Development of youth entrepreneurships
RESULTS
Build image and branding for SSAF Wider networking and collaboration among stakeholders Enhance the promotion and marketing strategies More public facilities for visitors Increase level of competition Increase local cultural and climate of SSAF High investment in people (education and training)
217
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Decrease level of migration among local people at SSAF Enhance the livelihood of people Diversify the product and activities offered at SSAF Increase number of visitors to SSAF Maintaining and improving facilities for visitors Increase level of infrastructures provided to SSAF (i.e. networking, internet)
Strengths relate to the key assets of the SSAF that offer some basis upon which rural development is dependent. An important asset of SSAF is it having the world’s longest Tree Top Walk, which can be experienced only at SSAF with a minimum fee for and open for public. Additionally, SSAF also rewarded with diversity of natural and cultural resources together with rural characteristics, which provides a favourable environment for rural development as well as for tourism activities. Due to these characteristics, the demand for nature and culture tourism products at SSAF is increasing. These factors are also supported by the safety and security at SSAF, which are among the most important preconditions for rural development. In order to maintain the strength factors, active promotion policies by local authorities and tourism officers are necessary to increase the supply of eco-tourism. Tourism operators, local communities, as well as local authorities can also initiate development of synergies of tourism and agriculture (i.e. fruit plantation and farm-tourism). Additionally, establishment of partnerships among the actors involved in rural development will ensure that promotional information about the SSAF is accessible to all parties involved in tourism development process. Opportunities identify potential sources of future benefits as it can be considered as rural characteristics that offer for eco-tourism as well as entrepreneurship development. There are also opportunities for economic growth and more jobs from SSAF’s products, but the opportunities depend on, and/or it could be achieved together with, the aspirations element. There is a need for appropriate support to ensure that the area can build on the strengths identified earlier in order to take advantage of these opportunities. Another opportunity that can be highlighted at SSAF is the
218
establishment of an entrepreneurship centre or incubator centre that should be available for tourism operators in order to enhance their level of business acumen. Although a diversity of natural and cultural resources together with a good tourism base were identified as strengths at SSAF, however marketing strategies and product diversification also were seen as one of the most obvious sources of opportunity at SSAF, especially for niche market products such as culture and heritage tourism besides the eco-tourism activities. There are also many opportunities for entrepreneurship development, especially for local communities and youth generation, who through gaining necessary skills and competencies could make a valuable contribution to new and existing economic activities. Encouraging innovation is important if success is to be achieved and sustained. This can be achieved through the supporting of potential entrepreneurs with innovative ideas, providing incentives, and awards. There are many rapids and mountain scrapes, which can be utilised for tourism attractions and activities at SSAF, such as Gunung Inas and Gunung Bintang that suit eco-tourists. Most of the previous studies using problem-solving approaches looked at the weaknesses of the particular place as one of their results. However, in using the AI approach, the weaknesses elements were replaced by aspiration, which looked at the potentials of the place. In this sense, many of the aspirations identified for SSAF revealed a few important elements, which are enhancing the environment for rural development at SSAF. The main aspiration is related to building image and branding for SSAF as for now there are no specific products or activities that show the real image of SSAF. Another part of aspiration that can be built is through the coordination,
219
cooperation, and linkages between tourism stakeholders in services, management, and products offered to customers. It is important for SSAF’s image because they have few operators that are managing and offering the products and services to customers. The next element is the need for stimulation of rural tourism development through education/training and provision of information, which are also observed as aspiration points. The last part of S.O.A.R analysis of SSAF’s development is to create a results-driven plan as well as to determine appropriate action and strategies for future planning. From the complete assessment of the strengths, exploring the opportunities available and the aspirations targets from the study, it is now to turn all of these elements into action. By engaging all elements and relevant stakeholders, the possibility for a greater understanding of tourism development at SSAF will be achieved. It also will contribute to the decrease level of migration among local people, as SSAF later will provide more opportunities and resources available. Indeed, it may enhance the livelihood of people through the various entrepreneurship development at SSAF. With the diversity of natural resources together with water-based activities, SSAF may attract many visitors with diversification of the products and activities offered to them. There are also significant results to maintaining and improving the facilities and infrastructures not just for local people, indeed for SSAF’s visitors. This will involve the energy, commitment, and tactical plans of all stakeholders to implement the strategies to achieve the results. One of the most significant issues in rural tourism development is the implementation of the sustainable development plans and strategies, especially in improvement
220
management practices and process. This why tourism activities should be focused on a type of resource management in which all economic, social and aesthetic requirements are fulfilled (Hardy & Beeton, 2001). The analysis from this study is also in agreement with Said, Aziz, and Adlan (2012), who claimed that: “…there are numbers of rules need to be considered in order to develop tourism attraction. First, a largely authentic natural or small scale and richly structured cultural landscape is desirable. Second, a landscape, which offers beauty as well as other cultural, historical, or natural attractions, would add value to the products. Third, good transportation links are required to make easily accessible by the public, and lastly basic tourism amenities too should be available (i.e. comfortable accommodations) as well as the acceptance and support by local people itself (p.g.188)”…
The study believed that these suggestions are important to ensure the sustainability of tourism attractions at SSAF for present and future visitors as well as to provide a more energetic businesses environment to attract other businesses and small industries. Another finding from this study also revealed several drivers of success that were highlighted by the participants to have an influence in developing tourism activities at SSAF as well as to create a sustainable tourism development. This is important as sustainable tourism is considered a complex system which requires the integration of tourism stakeholders involvement – local communities, local authorities, tourism operators and visitors (Carlisle et al., 2013; Ghasemi & Hamzah, 2014). In order to fill the gap in this study, the finding will extensively discuss a number of drivers of success to SSAF’s development, which later would contribute to putting this concept into practice. In this context, the factors identified came out from the discussions with participants and encompasses those factors that have a positive
221
influence on promoting sustainable tourism development at SSAF. The drivers were divided into several groups (see Figure 4.4).
Figure 4.5: Driving factors for SSAF’s development Most factors that were identified from the discussion with the participants relate to stakeholder cooperation and partnership, knowledge and awareness of tourism stakeholders, funding, support and best practices by authorities as well as the promotion and marketing of tourism products. These factors can be identified as “Strong driving factors”, which required more attention and action by all stakeholders. The group of factors included policies, strategies, and plans for tourism development, good public transport for accessibility, strong community support as well as varieties of extreme and challenging water-sport activities were classified as “Supplement driving factors”. 222
These factors are seen as important factors that complement and contribute to achieving sustainable tourism development at SSAF. Different stakeholders indicated their own interest towards the development of SSAF, as one of the participants noted that “should balance between tourism development and nature resources to ensure the sustainability of SSAF in future”. Previous studies also discussed the need and the importance of sustainable tourism development (e.g. Dwyer & Edwards, 2010) and the complex nature of this concept, which requires strong support and cooperation between multiple stakeholders involved in tourism development. The stakeholder cooperation and partnership, which includes local communities and tourism operators (as internal agents) with local authorities and visitors (as external agents), were acknowledged as an important factor that contributes to SSAF’s development. Any kind of business or development should have an integration and involvement of multiple parties to ensure that sustainable of tourism development will be achieved (Byrd et al., 2009). Furthermore, if the positive impacts of tourism at SSAF are to be maximised and the negative consequences kept to a minimum, local authorities need to allocate some funding, create a support centre, and promote best practices for tourism development. Hence, it should develop policies, plans, and strategies to achieve a better quality of life both for the local communities and for the nature resources upon which they depend. The next strong driver factors were identified as knowledge and awareness of tourism stakeholders, which is necessity when planning and managing tourism products particularly in rural area likes SSAF. This factor can be complemented with strong community support and engagement with tourism activities, thus contributing
223
significantly to the success of tourism development (Maxim, 2015). Indeed, knowledge and understanding of tourism planning would help in adopting and implementing sustainable tourism initiatives in practice (Byrd et al., 2009). Promotion and marketing strategies relates to SSAF’s assets, such as how history and cultural values play an important role, which is aimed at promoting it as one of the tourism products at SSAF in order to attract more tourists, especially for heritagetourists. Indeed, it may have more to do with gaining economic benefits from tourism development through the establishment of new tourism products at SSAF (e.g. extreme and challenging water-sport activities). This factor was identified by (Gössling and Scott, 2012) as necessary and may build a strong influence on the tourism industry and tourism stakeholders to offer a service mix that is perceived by the core customers as superior in achieving a competitive advantage. Good public transport for accessibility to SSAF was identified as one of the driver factors for successful tourism development, which it related to public transportation, such as bus and taxi. It may positively contribute to this development by providing good public transportation from the nearest cities, Kulim, Sungai Petani and Penang that may facilitate the transportation and attract many tourists to SSAF, especially international tourists. This was highlighted by a few of the participants who stated “although the main element of SSAF to be developed is through the attraction of tourism products, however the role of public transport to get to SSAF also important, especially for tourists”. Not just for local communities to have an access to the nearest city likes Kulim. In particular, Dodds (2012) asserted that transportation as one of the sectors which influences the level of tourism development at any destinations. Thus,
224
it is also important for local authorities to consider this for future planning of SSAF’s development. In addition to this, there are a number of other factors identified that contribute to the successful implementation of tourism development at SSAF by the local communities and tourism operators that were not mentioned by the local authorities. These include the formal training and education for managing business in tourism industry. In terms of training and education, it is believed that authorities should provide them with proper training and knowledge about the tourism industry so that they will understand the significant value of the tourism industry in their area. Besides, they will understand the concept of sustainable tourism and the advantages of implementing this concept into SSAF’s development. This is supported by Maxim (2015), who indicated that there are a combination of drivers that may contribute to the successful implementation of sustainable tourism at the local level and that their interaction should be carefully considered by policymakers. Indeed, working and consulting with partnerships between tourism stakeholders at SSAF in planning and development may create a harmonious contribution, could overcome possible conflicts and bring more resources and expertise to achieving sustainable tourism development. However, the lack of resources allocated for tourism, together with a lack of policies and strategies for the planning and management of tourism development could have significant negative consequences, particularly in the long-term (e.g. damaging the natural resources, diminished quality of life for local residents and leading to poor visitor experience) (Maxim, 2015). Therefore, it is believed that the sustainable 225
concept at SSAF’ condition needs to be high on the agenda of local authorities and needs to be considered a priority for all levels of development.
4.5.6 The significance of the social exchange theory in rural tourism studies
Adapting social exchange theory in this study is useful in exploring the contributions and potential of rural tourism development as well as to examine the level and degree of stakeholders’ support towards tourism development at SSAF. Analysis of the proposition in this study leads to the conclusion that SET has a significant relationship on the development of SSAF as one of the best eco-tourism spots in Malaysia. The finding from this study shows that most of the tourism stakeholders at SSAF recognised many positive and negative consequences of tourism development. They also appreciated the way industry enriched the community fabric while not discounting negative effects. The finding found that participants with more resources (such as lands, capital) indicated that they were dependent on tourism to make their earnings even better than what they already were. They will support the development of tourism at their area because they believed the industry would bring economy benefits, such as personal income and employment opportunity. Participants with fewer resources, especially those who had to face economic hardship, perceived that tourism created opportunities that allowed them to escape the hardship. They then become dependent on tourism for the earnings with which their lives become economically better. The relationship between stakeholders’ economic and attitudes towards tourism indicated that residents who are more dependent on tourism perceived higher impacts on tourism and their feelings on tourism become more
226
positive when the level of tourism increased (Ling et al., 2011). They also highlighted that the success of tourism development should not destroy what attracts the visitors in the first place particularly in rural area, i.e. the natural environment. Interestingly, the findings of current study are consistent with those of Coulson et al. (2014), who claimed that “a principle assumption of SET is that of human behaviour as a function of reward and punishment, pleasure and pain, cost and benefit, gain and loss, pay-off and the like”. Thus, from initial results, the study found that SET appears to have affected the perceptions and attitudes of rural communities towards SSAF’s development. The values of benefits are more related to their support towards tourism development. This can be seen in this study, in which “participants who are have a higher positions in the tourism industry such as the tourism operators, have more positive attitudes and support of tourism development (cost and benefit)”. While, “participants who are involved in middle positions likes’ local community, have a more negative attitudes and support of tourism development at SSAF (reward and punishment)”. Indeed, “respondent such as youth groups who have limited education and work in low position in tourism industry at SSAF have a positive perception of tourism which enhances their income and livelihood style (gain and loss)”. With that respects, this study believed that most of the participants have a good and positive perception of tourism, which they hope will enhance the SSAF’s development and stimulate their economic and society. In addition, this study also marks the early stage in the building of a theoretical framework, although the data obtained from this study were not designed to be
227
generalised to the greater population of Malaysian residents. The results of this study indicate that stakeholders’ attitudes towards toward tourism development are a function of residents’ evaluations of its impacts. SET, moderated by other factors such as stakeholders’ resources, their level of dependence on tourism, and their ability and willingness to adapt to changes brought by tourism, influences stakeholders’ support on mutual-end product of tourism at SSAF. The concepts explored by and the variables discovered from this study used to build a theoretical framework, may account for the evaluations of the impact of tourism as perceived by the tourism stakeholders. This can be illustrated in Figure 4.5:
Ability to take advantage (Potential & Opportunities)
Resources owned
Evaluation of exchange (SET)
(TTW, Nature, Ecotourism, cultural & agro)
Level of dependence
Mutually End Product of Tourism (DREAM)
(Impact of tourism)
Figure 4.6: The factors that determine the contributions of sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF This can be supported by Kayat (2002) who claimed that; “The fundamental policy option to assure successful tourism development is not whether the community should be ‘for’ or ‘against’ tourism, but whether tourism will bring the desired degree of ‘progress’ with the least undesirable impacts on the community. When there is no opposition from the residents toward the development, it does not necessarily indicate that tourism has brought the desired degree of progress nor does it indicate that tourism brings no harm”.
228
Thus, rural tourism development should be a good choice for tourism stakeholders to preserve rural landscapes, culture, and heritage as well as for promoting local traditions development. The study also believed that it is important to study what factors determine the attitudes and supports of residents with regard to tourism development particularly in SSAF’s context. The finding of this study demonstrated the relevance of social exchange theory in this field of research. In fact, the quality of the interactions between tourism stakeholders and tourism development plays an important role in influencing stakeholders’ attitude. With that, it provides evidence that the stakeholders-tourism interaction is important and may provide inspiration for the development of robust planning programs that place greater emphasis on rural development (Byrd, 2007). In this sense, the integration of SET in this study has made significant contributions toward rural tourism development at SSAF based on; (i) their evaluation of tourism’s benefits and costs, and (ii) their attitudes and supports toward SSAF development. We argue that SET provides a useful theoretical lens in exploiting the importance of attitudes and support and exchange in rural tourism development at SSAF.
4.6
Chapter Summary
Rural tourism development at SSAF could be a strategy for sustainable development as well as could be a tool for product differentiation and diversification. In summary, the study believed that although SSAF has great potential to be developed as one of the best tourism destinations in Malaysia, however not all areas or aspects of SSAF are suitable for that development. Indeed, not all local people or tourism stakeholders
229
at SSAF are happy with the development or not willing to have any kind of development at their area. Although there are significantly potentials for SSAF to be developed, however the acceptance and involvement of tourism stakeholders are important and need to take into consideration in any tourism planning. In particular, cooperation as well as the coordination between tourism stakeholders also was seen as one of the important elements for SSAF. Slow and stable steps are needed for this kind of planning in order to avoid conflicts and mistakes in this process. Despite, the development of rural tourism at SSAF is also a good opportunity for agricultural based communities but the setting of objectives and the final tourism development plan needs caution. Results from the study indicated that the tourism industry could be relied upon to drive SSAFs’ economic growth and development hence; local authorities should pay greater attention towards promoting tourism activities. This would contribute significantly to the structural diversification of the SSAF stakeholders’ livelihood and its resilience. Among the benefits that tourism contributes to the SSAF are the positive impacts created by tourism activities, increase the livelihood of local communities, improvement of public facilities and services, such as roads and telecommunication services.
230
CHAPTER 5
IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
5.1
Introduction
This chapter articulates the conclusions and recommendations of this study, of which its main aim is to explore the development of rural tourism in Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (SSAF) using the AI approach. It also provides an overall review of the research objectives, findings, conclusions, and recommendations of this study. However, emphasis will be placed on meeting the final objective of the study, which is to formulate strategies and guidelines that can be applied towards the development of tourism activities at SSAF. In addition, it is also to create the basis necessary for good practice among the local communities at Sedim’s area toward tourism development activities. The current chapter summarises the background of this research, the objective of this study, methodology as well as the finding. Apart from that, it is also the intention of the researcher to make explicit the contribution of this study to the discipline of rural tourism development at SSAF. Suggestions are made for future research as well as for responsible stakeholders that directly involve with the development of tourism activities at SSAF. This chapter concludes with key recommendations for rural tourism and development particularly in Kedah and Malaysia in general.
231
5.2
Implications and Recommendations
Much of the literature tend to agree that rural tourism development is important for tourism stakeholders, hence tourism industry in Malaysia need to develop not only a short- term perspective of tourism benefits, but also a long-term perspective of residents for sustainable tourism. Overall, this case study has illustrated the need to consider the strengths of the SSAF and focus on maintaining the tourism stakeholders’ (local communities, local authorities, visitors, and operators) perception derived from various tourism dimensions. This finding also suggests that tourism developers and marketers should not only know how tourism stakeholders perceive the impact of tourism but also how it affects their life satisfaction according to stages of tourism. The finding also has important implications for the maintenance of the facilities offered, as it is an aspect that requires a lot of attention or else the utilities and building structures either would be destroyed due to sheer negligence or would not be able to draw the desired number of tourists. Based on the observation at SSAF, it has been found that the tourism asset such as tourist information centre is not well maintained although the main function of this asset serves an important element for tourism development at SSAF. For maintaining this asset, it should involve the younger generation such as cleaners, guards, facilitators, or receptionists. Thus, not only the structures are utilized and maintained, indeed local community will get gainful employment resulting in self-sustainability. Based on the literature review and empirical findings, this study concludes that Appreciative Inquiry approach is the alternative tool that can evaluate and determine the contributions of rural tourism development, which may assist tourism stakeholders 232
to improve their capabilities in all dimensions towards tourism development. Under the present tourism conditions in SSAF, this study strongly recommends few dimensions to be implemented by tourism stakeholders. These recommendations were derived from the finding of this study as well as the researcher’s personal observation. It is hoped that the recommendation in this study may be able to contribute more values and entities for SSAF to be acknowledged as the best eco-tourism spot in Malaysia.
5.2.1 Recommendations for Local Communities and Tourism Operators
Coordination and cooperation between stakeholders For SSAF to be developed and promoted at the highest level, coordination and cooperation between the tourism stakeholders are extremely important. Most of participants in this study stressed the importance of public/ private sector relations with communities as well as the communities within the SSAF tourism areas. The roles of public official like UPEN is to control funds for key elements of tourism development and promotion. However, it will not work without cooperation, support and input from tourism operators and local communities. Tourism development requires different types of stakeholders to work together because, by its nature, tourism has intertwined relations between different types of business such as accommodations, food beverage, restaurants, and the tourist attractions. In communities with successful tourism, participants mentioned cooperation and coordination between local authorities and tourism operators are important and joint efforts to solve problems that may prevent maintenance or growth of tourism. As suggested in a previous study (Okech, Haghiri & George, 2012), which believed that 233
the difficult, intertwined tasks of tourism development in rural areas, environmental conservation and livelihood improvement is possible only through joint effort of different stakeholders, such as the government, entrepreneurs, non-profitable organizations, and the local community. Participants in FGD sessions said that a core group of people that have invest time, money and energy to make tourism work is the group that felt ‘senses of belonging’ is the main aspiration and most powerful elements in their life.
5.2.2 Recommendations for Local Authorities
Since the initial stage of the tourism development, local authorities including UPEN, Tourism Malaysia, Kulim Municipal Council, as well as Forestry Department are the main players t involved in the development of tourism at SSAF. Through the findings of this research and based on the literature review, the researcher can put forward some suggestions for development of rural tourism at SSAF for the benefit of all parties. 1.
Promotion and marketing strategies
Based on the findings from various perspective, the researcher forwards the following recommendations concerning promotion and marketing. Given that, there are number of different ways in which rural tourism development can be marketed, and based on consensus, the following elements should be included: i.
Branding – by developing a brand name or ‘identity’ of SSAF, rural development can help position themselves in an increasingly competitive market. It can also offer reassurance to potential customers. Through a
234
branding approach, it can not only be used to underpin mainstream marketing activity but should also be carried on visitor information, signage, and retail items. ii.
Tour Operators- use of travel agents in order to promote accommodations and activities at SSAF. For new entrants, they offer the advantage of knowing the tourism market place and can therefore represent a ‘one-stop-centre’ approach to marketing SSAF.
iii.
Direct marketing –through social media/ internet; an increasing number of operators and agents are adopting a direct approach to the marketing of their products. In this regard, the social media platform such as Facebook or blog as an ideal tool with which to promote rural activities at SSAF
iv.
Co-operative marketing – given the high costs of marketing, combined with the need to offer the customer a full range of accommodation and adventure activities, a co-operative approach to marketing was recommended for SSAF. This type of co-operative marketing activity could be led by the local tourism authorities or local organization on behalf of their members
2.
Investment and funding
While rural tourism is largely an activity for the private sector and small-scale enterprises in particular, investment in the industry is required at a number of levels in order to help ‘kick-start’ tourism and ensure the delivery of a quality, enjoyable experience for visitors. Most participants from both FGD and interviews suggested investment and funding as one of the important elements to develop and promote SSAF. Internal and external funding for rural development at SSAF is crucial 235
especially in areas where most of residents do not have sufficient incomes by themselves to invest. Local government and private sources should take more responsibility to support them such as technical assistance, development of the infrastructure (i.e. roads, signposting, and visitor information), enhancement of public facilities (i.e. toilets, prayer rooms, and changing rooms) and provision of start-up grants for small business ideas and youth programme. It is also important to make public funding for SSAF’s stakeholders, as they need to enhance the public infrastructures, for tourist attractions as well as for tourism promotion. Efforts to secure external funding can be cost-effective because businessperson, local government, and non-profits can pool resources. Apart from financial investment, rural tourism at SSAF also requires significant human resource investment in the form of time and energy. FGD participants reported that, although at the early stage of SSAF’s development between 2004 and 2007, the Kedah state government provided the funds to support tourism development in SSAF as well as to help advertise SSAF as tourism destination. However, the funding were designed and delivered without the proper planning and monitoring process. 3.
Fostering knowledge, education and capacity building
Many people work in the tourism sector, making it one of the world’s largest employers. To ensure this considerable workforce remains skilled motivated and ahead of the latest developments, thus local authorities such as Tourism Department should work closely with its Member of the States to advance tourism education and training particularly for tourism operators and local communities at SSAF. The need to provide a platform (e.g. volunteer tourism) to train young generations at SSAF for tourism 236
development and mobilizes them to contribute their expert knowledge to empower those beneficiaries willing to undertaken initiatives related to the sustainable tourism development. Forums for local community to share their voice and concerns about tourism development at SSAF are valuable for the cultivation of political empowerment. It is recommended that through providing opportunities for local community to voice their opinions about tourism, they will have favourable perceptions of tourism impacts and ultimately be more likely to support tourism. While these examples provide suggestions for specific ways to increase resident empowerment from tourism, they are ultimately tied to marketing strategies aimed at attracting tourists to their respective areas. 4. Legal framework The establishment of appropriate legislation and laws are a necessary pre-requisite between all stakeholders to ensure the successful of rural tourism development at SSAF. Indeed, the support and involvement of a number of government departments is necessary in any program or project conducted at SSAF. 5.
Strengthen the rural infrastructure and environmental construction
Provides a security for the development of rural tourism at SSAF. That is why the villages and agriculture are as backward as both are the result of poor infrastructures. Meanwhile, due to the relatively short time for the development of rural tourism and insufficient capital investment, that is why there are large differences among some rural tourists spots in such areas as transportation, accommodation, health and so on, which restricts the further development of rural tourism in rural area likes Sedim.
237
6.
Providing training and education programme on different aspects of
tourism Particularly to the people and personnel directly engaged in the tourism activities. This should cover a broad range of subjects including foreign languages, business & tourism techniques, the environmental & socio-cultural impacts of tourism, history, culture, local and national flora etc. In order to facilitate those programmes, steps must be taken to provide local communities with financial and technical backing, a field in which governments and NGOs have a key role to play. 7.
Advocate the green consumption of tourists
Green consumption is an overall improvement in their consumption tastes and spiritual and cultural levels and is a concrete manifestation of the implementation of the sustainable tourism concept. Most of rural development seeks to take effective measures to guide the tourists for green consumption and promote them to become responsible tourists. In view of the minimal negative impacts of the tourism economy, society, and ecological environment, it is important to implement a plan to achieve a sense of high-quality tourists, which is of great significance to promote the sustainable development of rural tourism.
5.2.3 Strategic Approach towards Rural Tourism Development
Rural tourism development at SSAF should encompass a range of activities that collectively contribute towards improving conservation and development. At one end of the range there may be community-owned and managed lands used for tourism
238
purposes with collective decision-making arrangements over the management and development of tourism. At the other hand, there might be private operators who have made an agreement with a group of community-based entrepreneurs to use their services and products such as guides and accommodations. Thus, the study suggest following strategic approach for rural tourism development at SSAF: 1.
Quality services and facilities – rural development products at SSAF need to be developed to the highest standard in order to cater for the needs of customers and encourage repeat custom, which is essential in sustaining longterm viability. Branding or labelling can be used as guarantee of quality and intensive planning effort is needed to identify market opportunities and options.
2.
Organization and Co-operation – due to fragmented nature of tourism at SSAF, there was a consensus that good organization was essential in ensuring the establishment and management of a successful rural tourism development. A rural tourism organization, which could involve community, operators, and the local municipality, could have responsibility for a wide range of activities such as providing business support and training.
3.
Linkages and networks- it is difficult for rural tourism enterprises to survive in isolation and therefore it is essential to build linkages and networks between rural tourism products providers. For example, by working closely together, the operators can offer attractive eco-tourism packages at SSAF. They may focus on value-addition, building upon natural and cultural assets, to existing activities resulting in increased revenues and incomes to local communities and incentives to conserve resources. 239
4.
Zonal approach – a zonal approach to rural development at SSAF can be considered as a strategy, which takes into account the natural and cultural assets of a particular destination (e.g. Area A – Mountain activities, Area BWater activities, Area C- Nature activities etc.)
5.
Clusters – In starting out, it is important to recognize that due to the economics of scale, the prospect of achieving financial viability in rural development at SSAF are more likely to be greater by ‘clustering’ rural tourism enterprise. Typically, this would involve using villages in order to build up a critical mass of facilities (i.e. accommodation, activities, cultural attractions, shops, and visitors’ information). In this way, it makes life easier for the visitor, while at the same complimentary tourism enterprises can benefit by passing on custom to each other.
6.
Diversification – agro-tourism or farm-tourism offers farming families in SSAF the opportunity to become involved in tourism activities. Diversifying tourism products at SSAF can be done by the inclusion of socio-cultural programmes and traditional activities involving local communities. In this regard, efforts should be made to improve planning, management and marketing of eco-tourism, not only as a sector with a great potential for economic development but for significant tool for conservation of the natural environment. Diversification beyond farm tourism is possible and desirable, if rural enterprises are to benefit from the full range of opportunities that exist in the market place (i.e. Interest in cultural tourism, activity and health tourism)
240
7.
Classification/ Grading systems- visitors want to have some indication or guarantee of minimum standards prior to booking their accommodation. Since there are few tourism operators that provide different types of accommodations, therefore classification/ grading schemes are an essential ingredient in ensuring that a consistent quality of product is available, under different price categories.
5.2.4 Applying the Concept of Sustainable Rural Tourism Development at SSAF
Although sustainability means different things to different people, it can mean the management of natural areas that should sustain the “naturalness” of the areas concerned like SSAF. It can also mean the management of tourism resources that should sustain the existing socio-cultural elements of the population directly or indirectly involved in tourism business. In the case of SSAF, sustainable development should mean ecologically sustainable development and that implies it will take care of all of our essential support system such as air, water, soil and vegetation. It is should also take care of the needs of the poorest people bot by giving them food, but by restoring their ability to look after themselves. This is by helping them to be selfreliance. Tourism is a business and primarily it is an area for private sector activity. Thus, greater efforts should be made to encourage and promote extensive private sector involvement in tourism development. The new focus of sustainable development and management of tourism at SSAF should be based on the promotion of economic
241
incentives and environmental education and on local community capacity building. Additionally, physical planning, strengthening the sustainability of tourism destinations in general, and eco-tourism products, in particular, in order to preserve the environmental and cultural quality of those destinations. In this regards, endeavours should be made to establish an atmosphere that raises confidence and encourages private sector investment in tourism projects and establishing joint ventures. As such, the planning of the tourism sector at SSAF should be based on international standards and regulations. Further to this study, certain deficiencies that are likely to have an adverse effect on the economic and tourism development in the area have been found. The economic development of the area with a significant but inappropriately exploited tourism potential may be boosted by rural tourism. However, in order to achieve such objective, these deficiencies should be remedied. For example, we can see that certain areas have tourism and leisure potential but are inappropriately developed and would require specific endowments and parking areas. While some areas have poor condition of the road network, which require the existing network to undergo modernization and extension to the areas having a tourism potential. Overall, the study would suggest the use of sustainable livelihood framework, which can be a guide the development of rural tourism at SSAF (see Figure 5.1). This is a framework developed by the UK Department for International Development (DFID) in 1999 and later was proposed by Ashley & Hussein (2000). The various components of this framework are closely inter-related: change in one often leads to change in others. Understanding such dynamic effects are key challenges of the sustainable
242
livelihood approach that is not adequately reflected in the two-dimensional framework. This framework provides an analytical structure, highlighting key components of livelihoods against which project impact can be assessed, and making the complexity of livelihoods more manageable.
Figure 5.1: Sustainable livelihood framework for rural development Source: Ashley & Hussein (2000) The aim of livelihoods framework is to gain an understanding of the significance of the project to the livelihoods of participants and other local communities, which can be applied in the SSAF’s environment. The key framework components are: 1.
Assets or a capital endowment- consists of natural, financial, physical, human, and social capital. These are the basic livelihood building blocks where both quality and quantity of assets matter, along with the options to convert assets into productive activities.
2.
Strategies and activities- what people do? Rural people usually pursue a diverse portfolio, including agro-farm activities and eco-tourism activities. 243
3.
Outcomes- components of improved livelihoods or well-being (e.g. good health, more income, empowerment, more sustainable use of natural resources base) – these are what people are trying to achieve through their activities and strategic planning.
4.
External influences- institutions, organizations and policies that effect the assets and opportunities that are available, and their productivity: e.g. government policy as well as access to markets
5.
Context: consists of the external environment in which people operate. The natural, demographic, and economic context shapes people’s access to assets and tends to increase their vulnerability.
6.
People’s strategies, priorities and preferences- people’s own priorities help shape their livelihood, while strategies may never be articulated, but they nevertheless influence people’s choice of which activities to combine, which outcomes to pursue, and which assets to invest.
5.3
Limitations of the Study
This study like any other study is not without its limitations and shortcomings. The main limitation of this study is the issue of generalization. As discussed before, the study was conducted at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest, Kulim, Kedah. Therefore, generalization to communities in other states of Malaysia and even in other regions of the country may be limited. As we are aware, residents in other local communities of Malaysia may have different perceptions towards tourism development in their areas. The finding of this study may be applicable to the surrounding area of Sedim and Kulim district only. It is hoped that the findings of this study may help to discover the 244
potentials and opportunities that may exist within the rural tourism activities and local communities at SSAF for the development of economic, social, and environmental conditions. Another limitation that has been identified in this study is the insufficiency of local government support in providing documentation and statistical information regarding to status of tourism industry in Kulim and Sedim. With the lack of research and reliable academic work done on Kulim’s tourism industry and particularly in local communities of Sedim has meant that this study must break new ground. In particular, it was found that the number, quality, and nature of available data on Sedim’s tourism are not clear. Therefore, this study has to rely on oral elements that are obtained from interviews with the involved operators. The National Audit Report also supports this where the key problem with SSAF is that there are no agreement/ specific documentations that recorded all the data and relevant information about SSAF. This is as a result of the lack of proper management and its failure to address the current issues and information related to SSAF’s development and this has motivated the researcher on the present study There are also limitations on how far the ideas/ concept of AI approach can be applied throughout the study. One of the problems with this issue was regarding to the researcher and participants availability. The study was limited to the first three stages of the AI’s cycle as recommended by Nyaupane & Poudel (2012), namely; Grounding, Discovery and Dream as this is the first-hand experience of the researcher in conducting an AI stages, data analysis as well as designing the process. Hence, AI is also a very time-consuming process, particularly during the grounding phases.
245
Perhaps, the lack of facilitators’ understanding and strategies employed during both the data collection and data analysis phases emerged as another disadvantage of this study. As a result, to practice in exploring, probing and discussing in some issues may be limited to some extend and need to be improved for embarking on the next AI’s study. This is supported by previous study that claimed AI can be no more than a daydream or a false hope if the process is not carefully followed which may lead to further alienation and frustration in participants (Nyaupane & Poudel, 2012). Thus, to remedy this limitation, the researcher needs to pay more attention to all groups of participants, encourage, and create an environment that allows them to feel comfortable sharing their stories and experiences. There are many challenged that we faced during this study, thus it is not the intention of the researcher to be too ambitious in conducting this research, and these limitations should be seriously acknowledged and take into consideration. As highlighted by previous studies (e.g. Barros-pose, 2014; Bodiford & Camargo-Borges, 2014) demonstrated the important role of AI facilitator play in ensuring that participants understand what is expected from them and supported through the various stages of the AI as this approach was proved that very effective as a research tool particularly in tourism field. Since this study was an AI-driven study, it was focused on describing a positive core of SSAF’s assets based on respondents’ perceptions and their dream (vision) for future development, as many people are not fully aware of their own potential and strengths. Indeed, implementing the AI approach requires commitment on behalf of all participants especially those in positions of responsibility.
246
5.4
Recommendations for Future Studies
As mentioned earlier in section 5.3, some limitations of this study would suggest few dimensions that can be examined for future studies. This research has encountered many questions that are in need of further investigation to enhance the scope and dimensions of this study. It is hoped that the findings from this may enhance the current phenomenon and create understanding towards rural tourism development in Malaysia besides it could be used as guidelines in developing tourism activities in other areas of concern. Therefore, it is recommended that further research be undertaken in the following areas; 1.
Expanding the study through a comparison approach between rural tourism areas in Malaysia. As for future research in this field, it is suggested to explore on how tourism development has affected the level of supports among tourism stakeholders. The results of the study may contribute to the expansion of tourism market in rural areas to meet the needs of tourists/ visitors. More information and investigation on this field would be helpful in order to establish not only a greater degree of accuracy on this matter, but for a better understanding of communities’ support towards rural tourism and tourism development in Malaysia.
2.
More research is needed in order to better understand when implementation of the AI approach can be done as in this study the approach is only limited to the first two stages of original AI Cycle (Discovery and Dream stage). Therefore, considerable more work will need to be done for future studies to continue for the next two stage (Design and Destiny stage) based on SSAF’s 247
perspective. Further studies should attempt to examine and understand what elements and factors that plays an important role to develop rural area likes SSAF. The goals and visions of rural development should be highlighted to ensure the respective participants have better ideas to share their stories and key values. 3.
From a further investigation, it is also suggested that as for future studies it is to integrate the application of AI in other areas of studies particularly in tourism industry, such as human resources and tourism education. Improving the understanding of the participants regarding the application of AI is also necessary. This is n through the grounding phase as suggested by scholars in previous studies. Another way to get close with respective participants is through participatory processes such as collaborative events, community meetings, and public involvement processes.
5.5
Conclusion
This study has explored the prospect and future development of rural tourism at SSAF using the Appreciative Inquiry approach and it is the first of its kind to conduct a field test using the AI approach in tourism development besides the integration of social exchange theory. The objectives of the study were to explore the strengths, potential, impacts, and perceptions of tourism stakeholders (local communities, local authorities, tourism operators, and visitors) towards sustainable rural tourism development at SSAF. This case study has made some contributions to theoretical and conceptual understanding of AI approach and SET in tourism field.
248
At the time of this research, there are only limited studies that have explored the application of AI approach within tourism field. Therefore, the researcher would argue that this case study particularly in SSAF’s perspective has made an attempt to understand the AI approach for rural tourism development. It was important because AI could be potentially used as a new tool and method for development of regardless of what types of tourism in local communities. However, little work could be found on the application and integration of AI and SET approach in tourism field, thus it indicated the importance of considering this approach for tourism studies. The data presented in this thesis has demonstrated a need for the development of tourism activities at SSAF. Hence, the study provides a focused academic analysis of this issue within tourism development at SSAF. The empirical study was conducted through focus group discussion and several personal interviews. The researcher was able to conduct two focus groups and several personal interviews with different groups of stakeholder, which consists of 35 participants from local communities and youth group in Sedim, 5 participants from local authorities of Kedah, 7 participants from tourism operators, as well as 12 participants from domestic and international visitors at SSAF. The total number of participants involved in this study was 59 and all of the participants involved were those who lived in the tourism zone of Sedim area and those who are either directly involved with, or affected by, tourism activities. The sampling population of this study was driven by the conceptual questions not by a concern for ‘representativeness’. This was to ensure that the target population was able to express their feelings and attitudes towards the development of tourism industry within their areas. For the purpose of this study, ATLAS.ti qualitative computer
249
database programme was applied in order to prepare and analyse the FGD’s and interviews in the analytical program. Besides the application of ATLAS.ti program, data were also analysed on an informal basis throughout fieldwork with the objective of adapting interview questions and becoming familiar with the data. This was followed by the main phase of data analysis involving an in-depth analysis of interviews and focus group transcripts from each of the interviews that will be employed in the whole phases of AI. It is important to note that the main limitation of this study is that it cannot be generalized to the other part of tourism destination particularly in Malaysia as other local communities of Malaysia may have different perceptions towards tourism development in their areas. The study has gone some way towards enhancing our understanding of rural tourism as well as the significance of sustainable tourism development in rural area. As discussed earlier, the key strengths of this study provide a new understanding of the integration of social exchange theory and AI approach in tourism research. By using both elements in this study, the findings can contribute to the current literature and extend our knowledge of the application of AI approach in tourism field. As the WTO’s reports that Malaysian tourism, have two main strengths: the unique environment and nature of the country, and the local people themselves. The industry has also become an important foreign-exchange earner, contributing to economic growth, providing employment, and attracting investments. In fact, the growth of Malaysian economy is related to the tourism industry because it has been identified as the most vital sector and acts as the best engine and driver for development.
250
Indeed, Malaysia has outstanding possibilities to empower the development of rural tourism as it is blessed with beautiful tropical rainforest, clean, unpolluted rivers with well-preserved unique culture and heritage site. Malaysia’s tourism interests in peripheral areas are diverse and yet commonly supported with the belief that tourism is an effective development vehicle. Thus, one of the most significant issue that emerge from this study is that rural tourism has become an important developmental agenda for any country due to its potential for business activities, which may provide benefits to the communities. Developing rural tourism does not mean letting go of local culture and traditions, in fact it may assist in maintaining the local cultural, social and environment. There are also reasons why it is important to develop Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest as rural tourism destination in Kedah. The study attempts to explore the past, current and future rural tourism development at SSAF in order to create economic growth and outline environmental objectives. It helps to improve the social conditions of the local communities and tourism operators at SSAF by recommending implementation of substantial involvement of the local residents in order to sustain vital rural tourism interrelationship between tourism development, biodiversity conservation, as well as livelihood improvement. The findings of this study will assist in alleviating poverty among local people in Sedim areas, and offer ways to overcome new economic, social, and environmental challenges. Besides, it may create a better understanding of the potential of rural tourism in Malaysia. This was supported by the finding from the study, which it is found that there are few elements/ factors that contributed to the development of rural
251
tourism at SSAF. It included; (i) nature characteristics, (ii) cultural and historical, (iii) eco-tourism activities, (iv) Tree Top Walk, and (v) Agro-tourism products. These key strengths of SSAF indicated the significance and contributions of rural tourism development at SSAF and Kedah in general. In respond to research objectives two, the study found there are many potentials and opportunities that can be promoted and developed, which may enhance the level of tourism development at SSAF. The first potential that can bring SSAF up to the international level is the development of ‘niche products’ at SSAF such as extreme activities and nature-resources activities. Second potential that has been highlighted is the development of rural entrepreneurship such as business incubators and training. Education and research centre also have been declared as part of rural potential at SSAF to encourage more education activities and program at SSAF. Another opportunity that has been indicated in this study was the development of home-stay program. It is found that the home-stay program become one of the important product in any rural areas as they have several of products and activities to be offered. Despite, the outcome of this study is to create and implement a high awareness and enthusiasm among the local population and tourism authorities on tourism potential and opportunities in SSAF. Indeed, SSAF’s development would be able to create more job opportunities and improve the standard of living of the affected population through, for example, upgrading public facilities such as public toilets and prayer room, accessibility from Kulim to SSAF, telephone, and internet network. It thus, may improve the image and status of SSAF in the eyes of tourists either domestically or internationally. The development of rural tourism at SSAF also can enrich, innovate
252
and optimize the structure of tourism products, adapt to the personalized tourism development, as well as help meet the diverse needs of tourists, open up the potential tourist market, and develop new incremental points of the tourism economy. Meanwhile, rural tourism development at SSAF is seen as very important in various conditions. For example, it may enhance the rural collective economy, beautifying the rural appearance, strengthening the rural civilization construction, increasing their incomes, reducing the urban-rural gap and building a harmonious society. Rural areas likes SSAF have been seen as appropriate locations for tourism activities especially for extreme and moderate visitors. It is believed that the only way to encourage rural area development at SSAF is to encourage rural tourism activities, because the development of rural tourism has significantly contributed to the preservation of local cultural heritage and more importantly to the nature of the environment. If the development of tourism is not properly planned, and managed, it may leave permanent footprints on the physical, social, cultural, and economic environment.
253
REFERENCES
Abbasi Dorcheh, S., & Mohamed, B. (2013). Local perception of tourism development: A conceptual framework for the sustainable cultural tourism. Journal of Management and Sustainability, 3(2), 31–39. Ahmad, A. R., Fauziah, W., Yusoff, W., Noor, H., & Kaseri, A. (2011). Preliminary study of rural entrepreneurship development program in Malaysia. In International Conference on Management (ICM 2011) Proceeding (pp. 537– 546). Malaysia: Universiti Teknologi Tun Hussin Onn. Akrivos, C., Reklitis, P., & Theodoroyiani, M. (2014). Tourism entrepreneurship and the adoption of sustainable resources. The case of Evritania Prefecture. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 148, 378–382. Anderson, E., Bakir, A., & Wickens, E. (2015). Rural tourism development in Connemara, Ireland. Touris, Planning & Development, 12(1), 73–86. Ap, J., & Crompton, J. L. (1998). Developing and testing a tourism impact scale. Journal of Travel Research, 37(2), 120–130. Ardahaey, F. T. (2011). Economic impacts of tourism industry. International Journal of Business and Management, 6(8), 206–215. Ashley, C., & Hussein, K. (2000). Developing methodologies for livelihood impact assessment: Experiences of the African Wildlife Foundation in East Africa (No. 129). Sustainable Livelihood. London, UK. Ateijevic, J., & Page, S. J. (2009). Tourism and entrepreneurship: International perspectives. (S. J. Page, Ed.)Advance in Tourism Reserach. United Kingdom: Elsevier Ltd. Avital, M., & Carlo, J. L. (2004). What knowledge management systems designers can learn from appreciative inquiry. Constructive Discourse and Human Organization, 1, 57–75. Aziz, M. N. A. (2014). Malaysia’s tourism industry exceeds expectations in 2013. Astro Awani, pp. 7–8. Malaysia. Retrieved from http://english.astroawani.com/news/show/malaysias-tourism-industry-exceedsexpectations-in-2013-30982?cp Baležentis, T., Kriščiukaitienė, I., Baležentis, A., & Garland, R. (2012). Rural tourism development in Lithuania (2003–2010) — A quantitative analysis. Tourism Management Perspectives, 2-3(2012), 1–6. Barros-Pose, I. (2013). The evolution of appreciative inquiry: A novel approach in the making. In Organizational Generativity: The Appreciative Inquiry Summit and a Scholarship of Transformation. Advances in Appreciative Inquiry (Vol. 4, pp. 391–407). United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559. Bel, F., Lacroix, A., Lyser, S., Rambonilaza, T., & Turpin, N. (2015). Domestic 254
demand for tourism in rural areas: Insights from summer stays in three French regions. Tourism Management, 46, 562–570. Bellinger, A., & Elliott, T. (2011). What are you looking at? The potential of appreciative inquiry as a research approach for social work. British Journal of Social Work, 41(4), 708–725. Bennett, N., Lemelin, R. H., Koster, R., & Budke, I. (2012). A capital assets framework for appraising and building capacity for tourism development in aboriginal protected area gateway communities. Tourism Management, 33(4), 752–766. Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. (S. L. Kelbaugh, Ed.) (4th ed.). United States of America: Pearson Education Company. Bernama. (2010). Kedah Provides Various Incentives To Woo Tourists To Langkawi. Bernama News Paper. Malaysia. Retrieved from http://www.bernama.com/bernama/state_news/news.php?id=513716&cat=nt Bernama. (2011a). Dr. Ng Yen Yen: Low foreign visitor arrivals to Kedah raise alarm bells. Retrieved November 16, 2012, from http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/low-foreign-visitorarrivals-to-kedah-raise-alarm-bells-for-ministry-of-tourism Bernama. (2011b). More efforts to promote Kedah to tourists in Langkawi. Bernama News Paper. Malaysia. Retrieved from http://www.malaysia.com/news/2011/02/more-efforts-to-promote-kedah-totourists-in-langkawi/ Bernama. (2013, June 2). Kedah focuses on attracting over 3 million tourists a year to Langkawi. The New Strait Time News Paper. Malaysia. Retrieved from http://web6.bernama.com/bernama//v3/bm/news_lite.php?id=953534 Berno, T., & Bricker, K. (2001). Sustainable tourism development: The long road from theory to practice. International Journal of Economic Development, 3(3), 1–18. Bhujbal, M. B., & Joshi, P. V. (2012). Agro-tourism a specialized rural tourism : Innovative product of rural market. International Journal of Business and Management Tomorow, 2(1), 1–12. Bitsani, E., & Kavoura, A. (2014). Host Perceptions of Rural Tour Marketing to Sustainable Tourism in Central Eastern Europe. The Case Study of Istria, Croatia. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 148, 362–369. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.054 Blanke, J., & Chiesa, T. (2013). The Travel & Tourism Competitiveness Report 2013. Geneva. Bodiford, K., & Camargo-Borges, C. (2014). Bridging research and practice: Illustrations from appreciative inquiry in doctoral research. International Journal of Appreciative Inquiry, 16(3), 1–14. Boyd, N. M., & Bright, D. S. (2007). Appreciative inquiry as a mode of action research for community psychology. Journal of Community Psychology, 35(8), 1019– 1036. 255
Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2008). Priorities in sustainable tourism research. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(1), 1–4. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2012). Towards innovation in sustainable tourism research ? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(1), 1–7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. Brida, J. G., Disegna, M., & Osti, L. (2011). Residents’ perceptions of tourism impacts and attitudes towards tourism policies in a small mountain community. SSRN Electronic Journal, 1–30. Briedenhann, J. (2008). The Role of the Public Sector in Rural Tourism: Respondents’ Views. Current Issues in Tourism, 10(6), 584–607. doi:10.2167/cit331.0 Bryman, A., & Bell, E. (2011). Business Reserach Methods (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Bryman, A., & Burgess, R. G. (1994). Development in qualitative data analysis: An introduction. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Analyzing qualitative data. London and New York: Routledge: Taylor & Francis. Buck, R. (2010). Rural tourism and agri-tourism: A practical approach to niche tourism. Tourism. North America: AgriTours North America Inc and Southern Ontario Tourism Organization (SOTO). Budeanu, A. (2005). Impacts and responsibilities for sustainable tourism: a tour operator’s perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(2), 89–97. Byrd, E. T. (2007). Stakeholders in sustainable tourism development and their roles: Applying stakeholder theory to sustainable tourism development. Tourism Review, 62(2), 6–13. Byrd, E. T., Bosley, H. E., & Dronberger, M. G. (2009). Comparisons of stakeholder perceptions of tourism impacts in rural eastern North Carolina. Tourism Management, 30(5), 693–703. Byrd, E. T., & Gustke, L. (2011). Using decision trees to identify tourism stakeholders. Journal of Place Management and Development, 4(2), 148–168. Cahyanto, I., Pennington-Gray, L., & Thapa, B. (2013). Tourist–resident interfaces: Using reflexive photography to develop responsible rural tourism in Indonesia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(5), 732–749. Carlisle, S., Kunc, M., Jones, E., & Tiffin, S. (2013). Supporting innovation for tourism development through multi-stakeholder approaches: Experiences from Africa. Tourism Management, 35, 59–69. Carmichael, B. A., & Ainley, S. (2014). Rural tourism entrepreneurship research. Tourism Planning & Development, 11(3), 257–260. Castellani, V., & Sala, S. (2010). Sustainable performance index for tourism policy development. Tourism Management, 31(6), 871–880. Chen, J. S. (2000). An investigation of urban residents’ loyalty to tourism. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 24(1), 21–35. 256
Choi, H. C., & Murray, I. (2010). Resident attitudes toward sustainable community tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(4), 575–594. Choi, H. C., & Sirakaya, E. (2006). Sustainability indicators for managing community tourism. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1274–1289. Chuang, S.-T. (2010). Rural Tourism: Perspectives from Social Exchange Theory. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 38(10), 1313–1322. Ciolac, R., Csosz, I., Merce, I. I., Balan, I., & Dincu, A. M. (2011). Study on the concept of rural tourism and leverage of some specific activities from rural areas through rural tourism. Scientific Papers: Animal Science and Biotechnologies, 44(2), 471–474. Clarke, H., Egan, B., Fletcher, L., & Ryan, C. (2006). Creating case studies of practice through Appreciative Inquiry. Educational Action Research, 14(3), 407–422. Cooperrider, D. L. (2014). A contemporary commentary on Appreciative Inquiry in organizational. In Organizational Generativity: The Appreciative Inquiry Summit and a Scholarship of Transformation Article information- Advances in Appreciative Inquiry (Vol. 4, pp. 3–67). United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Cooperrider, D. L., & Srivastva, S. (1987). Appreciative Inquiry in organizational life. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 1, 129–169. Cooperrider, D. L., & Whitney, D. (2005). Appreciative Inquiry: A positive revolution in change. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Cooperrider, D. L., Whitney, D., & Stavros, J. M. (2008). Appreciative Inquiry handbook-For leaders of change. (R. Fry, Ed.) (2nd ed.). Brunswick, Ohio: Crown Custom Publishing, Inc & Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. Cosma, S., Paun, D., Bota, M., & Fleseriu, C. (2014). Innovation– A useful tool in the rural tourism in Romania. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 148, 507– 515. Coulson, A. B., MacLaren, A. C., McKenzie, S., & O’Gorman, K. D. (2014). Hospitality codes and Social Exchange Theory: The Pashtunwali and tourism in Afghanistan. Tourism Management, 45, 134–141. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). London and New Delhi: Sage Publications Inc. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design- Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed methods Approaches (3rd ed.). United States of America: Sage Publications Ltd. Dabphet, S., Scott, N., & Ruhanen, L. (2012). Applying diffusion theory to destination stakeholder understanding of sustainable tourism development: A case from Thailand. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(8), 1107–1124. Darau, A. P., Corneliu, M., Brad, M. L., & Avram, E. (2010). The Concept of Rural Tourism and Agritourism (No. 5) (Vol. 5). Romania. Deery, M., Jago, L., & Fredline, L. (2012). Rethinking social impacts of tourism research: A new research agenda. Tourism Management, 33(1), 64–73. 257
Delgado, A. T., & Palomeque, F. lopez. (2012). The growth and spread of the concept of sustainable tourism: The contribution of institutional initiatives to tourism policy. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 1–10. Department of Statistics. (2011). Domestic tourism survey-Summary finding. Putrajaya, Malaysia. Department of Statistics. (2012). Domestic Tourism Survey. Putrajaya, Malaysia. Department of Statistics. (2013). Domestic tourism survey. Putrajaya, Malaysia. Department of Statistics. (2015). Domestic Tourism Survey. Malaysia. Dodds, R. (2012). Sustainable tourism: A hope or a necessity? The case of Tofino, British Columbia, Canada. Journal of Sustainable Development, 5(5), 54–64. Dogra, R., & Gupta, A. (2012). Barriers to community participation in tourism development : Empirical evidence from a rural destination. South Asian Journal of Tourism and Heritage, 5(1). Dole, D., Godwin, L., & Moehle, M. (2014). Exceeding expectations : An anthology of Appreciative Inquiry stories in education from around the world. (K. Gergen, D. Wulff, M. Gergen, & H. Anderson, Eds.). Ohio, USA: Toas Institue Publications/ WorldShare Books. Dong, E., Wang, Y., Morais, D., & Brooks, D. (2013). Segmenting the rural tourism market: The case of Potter County, Pennsylvania, USA. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 19(2), 181–193. Doveston, M., & Keenaghan, M. (2006). Growing talent for inclusion: Using an appreciative inquiry approach into investigating classroom dynamics. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 6(3), 153–165. Dwyer, L., & Edwards, D. (2010). Sustainable tourism planning. In J. J. Liburd & D. UEdwards (Eds.), Understanding the Sustainable Development of Tourism (pp. 19–43). United Kingdom: Goodfellow Publishers Ltd. Economic Planning Unit. (2010). Tenth Malaysia Plan 2011-2015. The Economic Planning unit. Putrajaya, Malaysia. Egbali, N., Bakhshandea, A., Khalil, S., & Ali, S. (2010). Investigation challenges and guidelines development of rural tourism– A case study of rural Semnan Province. South Asian Journal of Tourism and Heritage, 3(2), 61–75. Egbali, N., Nosrat, A. B., & Ali, S. (2011). Effects of positive and negative rural tourism (Case study: Rural Semnan Province ). Journal of Geography and Regional Planning, 4(2), 63–76. Ezung, T. Z. (2012). Rural tourism in Nagaland, India: Exploring the potential. International Journal of Rural Management, 7(1-2), 133–147. Falak, S., Chiun, L. M., & Wee, A. Y. (2014). A repositioning strategy for rural tourism in Malaysia - Community’s perspective. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 144, 412–415. Finegold, M. A., Holland, B. M., & Lingham, T. (2002). Appreciative Inquiry and public dialogue: An approach to community change. Public Organization 258
Review, 2, 235–252. Flanigan, S., Blackstock, K., & Hunter, C. (2014). Agritourism from the perspective of providers and visitors: a typology-based study. Tourism Management, 40, 394– 405. Frederick, M. (1993). Rural Tourism and Economic Development. Economic Development Quarterly, 7(2), 215–224. Freeman, R. E. (1996). Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation. In General Issues in Business Ethics (pp. 38–48). García-Rosell, J.-C., & Mäkinen, J. (2012). An integrative framework for sustainability evaluation in tourism: Applying the framework to tourism product development in Finnish Lapland. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1, 1–21. Garrod, B., Wornell, R., & Youell, R. (2006). Re-conceptualising rural resources as countryside capital: The case of rural tourism. Journal of Rural Studies, 22(1), 117–128. George, E. W., Mair, H., & Reid, D. G. (2009). Rural Tourism Development. Localism and Cultural Change. (M. Robinson & A. Phipps, Eds.). United Kingdom: Channel View Publications. Ghasemi, M., & Hamzah, A. (2014). An investigation of the appropriateness of tourism development paradigms in rural areas from main tourism stakeholders’ Point of view. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 144, 15–24. Gil Arroyo, C., Barbieri, C., & Rozier Rich, S. (2013). Defining agritourism: A comparative study of stakeholders’ perceptions in Missouri and North Carolina. Tourism Management, 37, 39–47. Retrieved from http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0261517712002427 Gössling, S., Hall, C. M., Ekström, F., Engeset, B., & Aall, C. (2012). Transition management : a tool for implementing sustainable tourism scenarios ? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(6), 899–916. Gössling, S., & Scott, D. (2012). Scenario planning for sustainable tourism : an introduction. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(6), 773–778. Grandy, G., & Holton, J. (2010). Mobilizing change in a business school using appreciative inquiry. The Learning Organization, 17(2), 178–194. Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24(2), 105–12. Gronau, W., & Kaufmann, R. (2009). Tourism as a stimulus for sustainable development in rural areas: A Cypriot perspective. An International Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism, 4(1), 83–95. Hall, D. (2004). Rural tourism development in southeastern Europe: Transition and the search for sustainability. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6(3), 165– 176. Hall, D. R., Kirkpatrick, I., & Mitchell, M. (2005). Rural tourism and sustainable business (Google e-book). London: Channel View Publications. 259
Hall, J., & Hammond, S. (2005). What is Appreciative Inquiry? In Lesson from the field: Applying Appreciative Inquiry (pp. 1–9). New York, USA: The Thin Book Publishing Co. 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. Harrill, R. (2004). Residents’ attitudes toward tourism development: a literature review with implications for tourism planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 18(3), 251–266. Haven Tang, C., & Jones, E. (2012). Local leadership for rural tourism development: A case study of Adventa, Monmouthshire, UK. Tourism Management Perspectives, 4, 28–35. Hawkes, E., & Robert, J. K. J. (2006). Connecting with the culture: A case study in sustainable tourism. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly, 47(4), 369–381. Heilbrunn, S. (2010). Entrepreneurial opportunities in changing communities. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 17(2), 247–259. Holland, J., Burian, M., Dixey, L., & Goodwin, H. (2003). Tourism in poor rural areas: Diversifying the product and expanding the benefits in rural Uganda and the Czech Republic (No. 12). Social Research. Czeh Republic. Hong Long, P. (2012). Tourism impacts and support for tourism development in Ha Long Bay, Vietnam: An examination of residents’ perceptions. Asian Social Science, 8(8), 28–39. Hwang, D., Stewart, W. P., & Ko, D. (2011). Community behavior and sustainable rural tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 51(3), 328–341. Hwang, J., & Lee, S. (2015). The effect of the rural tourism policy on non-farm income in South Korea. Tourism Management, 46, 501–513. Ibrahim, J. A., & Ahmad, M. Z. (2008). Pelancongan Negeri Kedah Darul Aman: Isu dan Cabaran. In Persidangan Kebangsaan Ekonomi Malaysia ke III (PERKEM III) (Vol. 1, pp. 191–202). Malaysia: Universiti Utara Malaysia Press. Imran, S., Alam, K., & Beaumont, N. (2014). Environmental orientations and environmental behaviour: Perceptions of protected area tourism stakeholders. Tourism Management, 40, 290–299. J.Page, S. (2009). Tourism management: Managing for change. Tourism Management (3rd ed.). United States of America: Butterworth-Heinemann Elsevier Ltd. Jaafar, W. (2010a). Mekanisme pengurusan pelancongan perlu efisien. Warta Kedah. Jaafar, W. (2010b, November 16). Ulu Legong dinaiktaraf, Lata Celak dibangunkan. Warta Kedah. Malaysia. Retrieved from http://wartakedah.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=533:ul u-legong-dinaiktaraf-lata-celakdibangunkan&catid=36:berita&Itemid=67&lang=ms Jaini, N., Aris Anuar, A. N., & Daim, M. S. (2012). The practice of sustainable tourism 260
in ecotourism sites among ecotourism providers. Asian Social Science, 8(4), 175– 179. Jenny Phillmore, & Goodson, L. (2004). Qualitative research in tourism: Ontologies, epistemologies and methodologies. Tourism. New York: Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group. Judy, S., & Hammond, S. (2006). An introduction to Appreciative Inquiry. Argenta, B.C. Jurowski, C. a. (2009). Building community capacity for tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 36(4), 751–752. Kayat, K. (2002). Power, social exchanges and tourism in Langkawi: Rethinking resident perceptions. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(3), 171–191. Kayat, K. (2011). Homestay programme as Malaysian product. Malaysia: Universiti Utara Malaysia Press. Kerajaan Negeri Kedah. (2013). Portal Kerajaan Negeri Kedah Darul Aman. Retrieved June 13, 2014, from http://www.kedah.gov.my Keyim, P., Yang, D., & Zhang, X. (2005). Study of rural tourism in Turpan, China. Chinese Geographical Science, 15(4), 377–382. Khavarian-Garmsir, A. R., & Zare, S. M. (2014). SOAR Framework as an new model for the strategic planning of sustainable tourism. Tourism Planning & Development, 1–12. Kim, J.-H. (2014). The antecedents of memorable tourism experiences: The development of a scale to measure the destination attributes associated with memorable experiences. Tourism Management, 44, 34–45. Kim, K., Uysal, M., & Sirgy, M. J. (2013). How does tourism in a community impact the quality of life of community residents ? Tourism Management, 36, 527–540. Kirschenhofer, F., & Lechner, C. (2012). Performance drivers of serial entrepreneurs: Entrepreneurial and team experience. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 18(3), 305–329. Knowd, I. (2001). Rural tourism : Panacea and paradox. Sydney, Australia. Koster, R. L. P. (2008). Mural-based tourism as a strategy for rural community economic development. In Advances in Culture , Tourism and Hospitality Research (2nd ed., pp. 153–292). Arch G. Woodside: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Koster, R. L. P., & Lemelin, R. H. (2009). Appreciative Inquiry and rural tourism: A case study from Canada. Tourism Geographies, 11(2), 256–269. Kruja, D., & Hasaj, A. (2010). Comparisons of stakeholders’ perception towards the sustainable tourism development and its impacts in Shkodra Region (Albania). Turizam, 14(1), 1–12. Kulim District Council. (2004). Rancangan Tempatan Daerah Kulim 2004-2020. Malaysia. Kulim District Council. (2013). Official Website of Kulim Municipal Council. 261
Retrieved April 20, 2013, http://www.mpkk.gov.my/web/guest/kulim_district_tourism
from
Kulim District Office. (2011). Pelancongan Kulim. Retrieved July 20, 2012, from http://lamanwebpejabatdaerahkulim.blogspot.com/ Kulim District Office. (2014). The Tree Top Walk. Retrieved May 10, 2014, from http://webjabatan.kedah.gov.my/pdk.php Kunasekaran, P., & Gill, S. S. (2012). Local communities’ perception on rural tourism. Global Journal of Human Social Science, 12(1), 35–40. Lane, B. (1994). What is rural tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2(1-2), 7–21. Lane, B. (2005). Sustainable Rural Tourism Strategies : A Tool for Development and Conservation. Interamerican Journal of Environment and Tourism, 1(1), 12–18. Lankford, S. V. (1994). Attitudes and Perceptions Toward Tourism and Rural Regional Development. Journal of Travel Research, 32(3), 35–43. Lapan, C., & Barbieri, C. (2014). The role of agritourism in heritage preservation. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(8), 666–673. Laszlo, C., & Cooperrider, D. L. (2010). Creating sustainable value: A strength-based whole system approach. In T. Thatchenkery, D. L. Cooperrider, & M. Avital (Eds.), Advance in Appreciative Inquiry- Positive Design and Appreciative Construction: From Sustainable Development to Sustainable Value (1st ed., pp. 17–33). Bingley, United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Latkova, P., & Vogt, C. A. (2011). Residents’ attitudes toward existing and future tourism development in rural communities. Journal of Travel Research, 51(1), 50–67. Leco, F. P., Hernandez, J. M., & Campon, A. . (2013). Rural tourists and their attitudes and motivations towards the practice of environmental activities such as Agrotourism. International Journal of Environment Research, 7(1), 255–264. Lewis, S., Passmore, J., & Cantore, S. (2008). Appreciative Inquiry for change management- Using AI to facilitate organizational development. London and Philadelphia: Kogan Page Limited. Liburd, J. J. (2010). Introduction to sustainable tourism development. In J. J. Liburd & D. Edwards (Eds.), Understanding the Sustainable Development of Tourism (pp. 1–18). United Kingdom: Goodfellow Publishers Limited. Ling, L. P., Jakpar, S., Johari, A., Myint, K. T., & Rani, N. S. A. (2011). An evaluation on the attitudes of residents in Georgetown towards the impacts of tourism development. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(1), 264– 277. Ling, S. M. A. Y., Abidin, Z. Z., Nair, V., Ramachandran, S., & Shuib, A. (2011). Developing criteria and indicators for responsible rural tourism in Taman Negara National Park (TNNP), Malaysia. The Malaysian Forester, 74(2), 143–155. Liu, A. (2006). Tourism in rural areas: Kedah, Malaysia. Tourism Management, 27, 878–889. 262
Liu, Z. (2010). Sustainable tourism development: A critique. Journal of Sustainable Sustainable Tourism, 11(6), 459–475. Lo, M.-C., Mohamad, A. A., Songan, P., & Yeo, A. W. (2012). Positioning rural tourism: Perspectives from the local communities. International Journal of Trade, Economic and Finance, 3(1), 59–65. Lordkipanidze, M. (2002). Enhancing entrepreneurship in rural tourism for sustainable regional development: The case of Söderslätt region, Sweden. The International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics. Sweeden. Lordkipanidze, M., Brezet, H., & Backman, M. (2005). The entrepreneurship factor in sustainable tourism development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13(8), 787– 798. MacNeill, F., & Vanzetta, J. (2014). Appreciative leadership: Delivering sustainable difference through conversation and inquiry. Industrial and Commercial Training, 46(1), 16–24. Mafunzwaini, A. E., & Hugo, L. (2005). Unlocking the rural tourism potential of the Limpopo province of South Africa: Some strategic guidelines. Development Southern Africa, 22(2), 251–265. Mahmoudi, B., Haghsetan, A., & Maleki, R. (2011). Investigation of obstacles and strategies of rural tourism development using SWOT Matrix. Journal of Sustainable Development, 4(2), 136–142. Manikumar S. (2011, November 2). Pelancongan di Negeri Kedah meningkat. Bernama News Paper. Malaysia. Retrieved from http://www.kedahlanie.info/2011/11/pelancongan-di-kedah-meningkatdakwaan.html Maria, S., & Loureiro, C. (2014). The role of the rural tourism experience economy in place attachment and behavioral intentions. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 40, 1–9. Martin, T. L. S., & Calabrese, R. L. (2011). Empowering at-risk students through appreciative inquiry. International Journal of Educational Management, 25(2), 110–123. McGehee, N. G., & Andereck, K. L. (2004). Factors predicting rural residents’ support of tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 43(2), 131–140. McGehee, N. G., & Kim, K. (2004). Motivation for Agri-tourism entrepreneurship. Journal of Travel Research, 43(2), 161–170. Medlik, S. (2003). Dictionary of travel, tourism & hospitality. British Library (3rd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann. Mensah, C. (2012). Residents’ perception of socio-economic impacts of tourism in Tafi Atome, Ghana. Asian Social Science, 8(15), 274–287. Mensah, S. N.-A., & Benedict, E. (2010). Entrepreneurship training and poverty alleviation: Empowering the poor in the Eastern Free State of South Africa. African Journal of Economic and Management Studies, 1(2), 138–163. Michael, S. (2005). The promise of Appreciative Inquiry as an interview tool for field 263
research. Development in Practice, 15(2), 222–230. Ministry of Tourism Malaysia. (2013). Malaysia Country Report. In UNWTO 25th CAP-CSA and UNWTO Conference on Sustainable Tourism Development (pp. 1–12). Hyderabad, India: World Tourism Organization. Mohamad, A. A., Lo, M., Songan, P., & W.Yeo, A. (2012). Dimensionality of communities’ belief attitude toward rural tourism development. British Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 6(2), 245–254. Mohammadi, M., Khalifah, Z., & Hosseini, H. (2010). Local people perceptions toward social ,economic and environmental impacts of tourism in Kermanshah (Iran ). Asian Social Science, 6(11), 220–225. Morrison, A. (2000). Qualitative data analysis. In Investigating the Social World (pp. 320–357). United Kingdom: Sage Publications Inc. Moscardo, G. (2008). Community capacity building: An emerging challenge for tourism development. In G. Moscardo (Ed.), Building Community Capacity for Tourism Development (pp. 1–15). United Kingdom: CABI International. Muhammad, M., Hamzah, A., Mohamed Shaffril, H. A., Lawrence D Silva, J., Md. Yassin, S., Abu Samah, B., & Tiraieyari, N. (2012). Involvement in agro-tourism activities among Fishermen Community in two selected Desa Wawasan Nelayan Villages in Malaysia. Asian Social Science, 8(13), 239–243. Muhr, T. (2004). ATLAS.ti the knowledge workbench. User’s guide and reference (2nd ed.). United States of America: ResearchTalk Inc., Bohemia. Nair, V., Munikrishnan, U. T., Rajaratnam, S. D., & King, N. (2014). Redefining rural tourism in Malaysia: A conceptual perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 1–25. Njoroge, J. M. (2014). An enhanced framework for regional tourism sustainable adaptation to climate change. Tourism Management Perspectives, 12, 23–30. Nunkoo, R. (2015). Tourism development and trust in local government. Tourism Management, 46, 623–634. Nunkoo, R., & Ramkissoon, H. (2010). Modeling community support for a proposed integrated resort project. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(2), 257–277. Nurul, M., Mazumder, H., Ahmed, E. M., & Raquib, A. (2011). Estimating total contribution of tourism to Malaysian economy. International Journal of Business, Management and Social Sciences, 2(3), 29–34. Nyaupane, G. P., & Poudel, S. (2011). Linkages among biodiversity, livelihood, and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1344–1366. Nyaupane, G. P., & Poudel, S. (2012). Application of appreciative inquiry in tourism research in rural communities. Tourism Management, 33(4), 978–987. Nzama, A. T. (2008). Socio-cultural impacts of tourism on the rural areas within the World Heritage Sites – The case of KwaZulu- Natal, South Africa. South Asian Journal of Tourism and Heritage, 1(1), 1–8. Okech, R., Haghiri, M., & George, B. P. (2012). Rural tourism as a sustainable 264
development alternative: An analysis with special reference to Luanda, Kenya. Cultur- Special Issue, 6(3), 36–54. Oliveira, E. (2014). The tourism potential of Northern Portugal and its relevan for a regional branding strategy. Advances in Hospitality and Tourism Research, 2(2), 54–78. Oviedo-garcia, M. A., Castellanos-verdugo, M., & Martin-ruiz, D. (2008). Gaining residents’ support for tourism and planning. International Journal of Tourism Research, 10, 95–109. Page, S. J., & Getz, D. (1997). The business of rural tourism: International perspectives. In The Business of Rural Tourism: International Perspectives (1st ed., pp. 3–37). United Kingdom: International Thomson Publishing Inc. Pakurar, M., & Olah, J. (2008). Definition of rural tourism and its characteristics in the northern great plain region. Fascicula: Ecotoxicologie, Zootehni Si Technologii De Industrie Alimentara, VII(7), 777–782. Paniagua, A. (2002). Urban-rural migration, tourism entrepreneurs and rural restructuring in Spain. Tourism Geographies, 4(4), 349–371. Park, D.-B., Lee, K.-W., Choi, H.-S., & Yoon, Y. (2012). Factors influencing social capital in rural tourism communities in South Korea. Tourism Management, 33(6), 1511–1520. Park, E., & Boo, S. (2010). An assessment of convention tourism’s potential contribution to environmentally sustainable growth. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(1), 95–113. Pastras, P., & Bramwell, B. (2013). A strategic-relational approach to tourism policy. Annals of Tourism Research, 43, 390–414. Patzelt, H., & Shepherd, D. a. (2011). Recognizing opportunities for sustainable development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(4), 631–652. Pearce, P. L. (2008). Sociocultural benefits of tourism to destinations. In G. Moscardo (Ed.), Building Community Capacity for Tourism Development (pp. 29–40). United Kingdom: CABI International. PEMANDU. (2009). Chapter 10- Reviving Up the Tourism Industry. Malaysia. PEMANDU. (2011). Economic Transformation Programme: Annual Report. Malaysia. PEMANDU. (2013). Economic Transformation Programme: Annual Report. Malaysia. PEMANDU. (2015). ETP Annual Report 2014. Malaysia. Retrieved from www.pemandu.gov.my Pena, A. I. P., Jamilena, D. M. F., & Molina, M. A. R. (2012). Market orientation as a strategy for the rural tourism sector: Its effect on tourist behavior and the performance of enterprises. Journal of Travel Research, 52(2), 225–239. Pender, J. L., Weber, J. G., & Brown, J. P. (2014). Sustainable rural development and wealth creation: Five observations based on emerging energy opportunities. 265
Economic Development Quarterly, 28(1), 73–86. Pierret, F. (2012). Development of Sustainable Rural Tourism. UNWTO. United States of America. Plummer, J., & Remenyi, J. (2004). Enhancing local government capacity for community participation. In J. Plummer & J. G. Taylor (Eds.), Community Participation in China: Issues and Processes for Capacity Building (pp. 307– 341). United Kingdom, United State: Earthscan. Plummer, J., & Taylor, J. G. (2004). Understanding community participation in China. In J. Plummer & J. G. Taylor (Eds.), Community Participation in China: Issues and Processes for Capacity Building (pp. 23–92). United Kingdom, United State: Earthscan. Prabhakaran, S., Nair, V., & Ramachandran, S. (2014). Community participation in rural tourism: Towards a conceptual framework. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 144, 290–295. Pratt, L., & Rivera, L. (2011). Tourism: Investing in energy and resource efficiency. United States of America. Preskill, H., & Catsambas, T. T. (2006). Reframing evaluation through Appreciative Inquiry. Ohio, United States of America: Sage Publications Inc. Puczkó, L., & Rátz, T. (2000). Tourist and resident perceptions of the physical impacts of tourism at Lake Balaton Hungary : Issues for sustainable tourism management. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(6), 458–478. Rabiee, F. (2004). Focus-group interview and data analysis. Nutrition Society, 63, 655–660. Ranđelović, N., Stefanović, V., & Azemović, N. (2012). Suva Planina as development area of rural tourism. Economics of Agriculture, 44(59), 333–345. Ray, N., Das, D. K., Sengupta, P. P., & Ghosh, S. (2012). Rural tourism and it’s impact on socio- economic condition: evidence from Eest Bengal, India. Global Journal of Business Research, 6(2), 11–23. Raymond, E. M., & Hall, C. M. (2008a). The development of cross-cultural (Mis) understanding through volunteer. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(5), 530– 543. Raymond, E. M., & Hall, C. M. (2008b). The potential for appreciative inquiry in tourism research. Current Issues in Tourism, 11(3), 281–292. Razzaq, A. R. A., Hadi, M. Y., & Mustafa, M. Z. (2011). Local community participation in homestay program development in Malaysia. Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, 7(12), 1418–1429. Razzaq, A. R. A., Mohamad, N. H., Kader, S. S. S. A., Mustafad, M. Z., Hadi, M. Y. A., Hamzah, A., & Khalifah, Z. (2013). Developing human capital for rural community tourism : Using Experiential Learning Approach. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 1835–1839. Reid, M., & Schwab, W. (2006). Barriers to Sustainbale Development- Jordan’s Sustainable Tourism Strategy. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 41(5/6), 266
439–457. Richard, T., Chandrarathne, B., & Chandana, J. (2013). Engaging the rural communities of Sri Lanka in sustainable tourism. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 5(5), 464–476. Riley, R. W., & Love, L. L. (2000). The state of qualitative tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(1), 164–187. Roberts, L., & Hall, D. (2004). Consuming the countryside: Marketing for “rural tourism.” Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10(3), 253–263. Ruhanen, L. (2012). Local government: facilitator or inhibitor of sustainable tourism development? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, (December), 1–19. Sadler, J. (2004). Sustainable tourism planning in Northen Cyprus. In B. Bramwell & C. Cooper (Eds.), Coastal Mass Tourism: Diversification and Sustainable Development in Southern Europe (pp. 133–155). United Kingdom: Channel View Publications. Saldana. (2008). An Introduction to codes and coding. In The Coding for Qualitative Researchers (pp. 1–31). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Saleem, S., & Zain-Ul-Abideen. (2011). Examining success factors: Entrepreneurial approaches in mountainous regions of Pakistan. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(4), 56–67. Santagata, W., Paolo, A. S., & Giovanna, R. (2007). Tourism quality labels: an incentive for the sustainable development of creative clusters as tourist attractions? In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), Tourism , Creativity and Development (pp. 107–124). London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research methods for business students (5th ed.). England: Pearson Education Limited. Scott, D. (2011). Why sustainable tourism must address climate change. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(1), 17–34. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2013). Research Methods for Business (6th ed.). United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons,Inc. Sharpley, R. (2000). Tourism and sustainable development: Exploring the theoretical divide. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(1), 1–19. Sharpley, R. (2009a). Destination capitals: An alternative framework for tourism development. In Tourism Development and the Environment : Beyond Sustainability ? (pp. 175–198). United Kingdom: Earthscan. Sharpley, R. (2009b). Sustainable tourism development: A critique. In R. Sharpley (Ed.), Tourism Development and the Environment : Beyond Sustainability ? (pp. 57–86). United Kingdom: Earthscan. Sharpley, R. (2014). Host perceptions of tourism: A review of the research. Tourism Management, 42, 37–49. Sharpley, R., & Jepson, D. (2011a). Rural tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 52–71. 267
Sharpley, R., & Jepson, D. (2011b). Rural tourism: A spiritual experience? Annals of Tourism Research, 38(1), 52–71. Sharpley, R., & Roberts, L. (2004a). Rural tourism — 10 years on. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6(3), 119–124. Sharpley, R., & Roberts, L. (2004b). Rural tourism — 10 years on. International Journal of Tourism Research, 6(3), 119–124. doi:10.1002/jtr.478 Silverman, D. (2011). Interpreting Qualitative Data: A Guide to the principles of qualitative research (4th ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd. Sin, L. Y. M., Tse, A. C. B., Chan, H., Heung, V. C. S., & Yim, F. H. K. (2006). The effects of relationship marketing orientation on business performance in the hotel industry. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 30(4), 407–426. Sirakaya, E., Teye, V., & Sonmez, S. (2002). Understanding residents’ support for tourism development in the Central Region of Ghana. Journal of Travel Research, 41(1), 57–67. Siti-Nabiha, A. ., Wahid, N. A., A.Amran, Haat, H. C., & Abustan, I. (2009). Towards s sustainable tourism management in Malaysia. Journal of Business, 4, 301–312. Sola, E. F., Moraleda, L. F., & Mazon, A. I. M. (2012). Tourism for development. In Knowledge Management in Tourism: Bridging Tourism Theory and Practice (pp. 3–31). United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Spense, M., Boubaker, J. Ben, Gherib, & Biwole, V. O. (2008). A framework of SMEs’ strategic involvement in sustainable development. In R. Wüstenhagen, J. Hamschmidt, S. Sharma, & M. Starik (Eds.), Sustainable Innovation and Entrepreneurship (pp. 49–60). United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited. Sprangel, J., Stavros, J., & Cole, M. (2011). Creating sustainable relationships using the strengths, opportunities, aspirations and results framework, trust, and environmentalism: A research-based case study. International Journal of Training and Development, 15(1), 39–57. Stavros, J., & Hinrichs, G. (2007). SOARing to high and engaging performance: An appreciative approach to strategy. The International Journal of AI Best Practice, (August), 1–9. Stavros, J. M., & Cole, M. L. (2013). SOARing towards positive transformation and change. The ABAC ODI Visions Action Outcome, 1(1), 10–34. Stirling, J. A.-. (2001). Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 385–405. Stolarick, K., Denstedt, M., Donald, B., & Spencer, G. M. (2010). Creativity, tourism and economic development in a rural context: The case of Prince Edward County. Journal of Rural and Community Development, 5(1/2), 238–254. Stratton-Berkessel, R. (2010). Appreciative Inquiry for collaborative solutions- 21 Strengths-based workshop. (H. J. Allen, Ed.). San Francisco, USA: Pfeiffer- John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Strickland-Munro, J. K., Allison, H. E., & Moore, S. a. (2010). Using resilience 268
concepts to investigate the impacts of protected area tourism on communities. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(2), 499–519. Stylidis, D., Biran, A., Sit, J., & Szivas, E. M. (2014). Residents’ support for tourism development: The role of residents' place image and perceived tourism impacts. Tourism Management, 45, 260–274. Surugiu, C. (2006). Development of rural tourism through entrepreneurship. Journal of Tourism, 8, 65–72. Tang, C. F., & Tan, E. C. (2015). Does tourism effectively stimulate Malaysia’s economic growth? Tourism Management, 46, 158–163. Tang, Z. (2015). An integrated approach to evaluating the coupling coordination between tourism and the environment. Tourism Management, 46, 11–19. Tanguay, G. A., Rajaonson, J., & Therrien, M.-C. (2012). Sustainable tourism indicators: Selection criteria for policy implementation and scientific recognition. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1–18. Tatoglu, E., Erdal, F., Ozgur, H., & Azakli, S. (1999). Resident Perceptions of the impact of tourism in a Turkish Resort Town. Thatchenkery, T., Avital, M., & Cooperrider, D. L. (2010). Introduction to positive design and appreciative construction: From sustainable development to sustainable value. In D. L. Cooperrider (Ed.), Advances in Appreciative Inquiry (Vol. 3, pp. 1–14). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. The Mountain Institute. (2000). Community-based tourism for conservation and development: A resources kit. USA. The National Audit Department. (2012). Annual Report of the National Audit Department for Kedah State (Series 1). Malaysia. Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews (No. 10/07). BMC medical research methodology (Vol. 8). Tian, Y. E., Lee, H. A., & Law, R. (2011). A comparison of research topics in leading tourism journals. International Journal of Tourism Sciences, 11(3), 108–126. Torres-Delgado, A., & Palomeque, F. L. (2014). Measuring sustainable tourism at the municipal level. Annals of Tourism Research, 49, 122–137. Tourism Development Council. (2012). Tourism Malaysia corporate website. Retrieved September 21, 2012, from http://corporate.tourism.gov.my/aboutus.asp Tourism Malaysia. (2010). Tourism Malaysia Annual Report. Ministry of Tourism Malaysia. Tourism Malaysia. (2015). Malaysia Tourism Statistics. Retrieved January 25, 2016, from http://www.tourism.gov.my/statistics Tsonis, J. L., & Cheuk, S. (2000). Sustainability Challenges : Changing Attitudes and a Demand for Better Management of the Tourism Industry in Malaysia. Policy and Urban Development- Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment. 269
Malaysia. Tureac, C. E., Turtureanu, A. G., & Bordean, I. (2008). General considerations on rural tourism. Tourism. French. Turtureanu, A. (2006). The contribution of rural tourism to the sustainable development of the rural areas. Economica- Business Administration, 1, 103–122. United-Nations. (2001). Tourism review: Managing sustainable tourism development. (E. A. S. C. F. A. A. T. PACIFIC, Ed.)Tourism. New Jersey. United-Nations. (2006). The contribution of tourism towards reducing poverty and managing globalization (No. 25). (E. WORKS, Ed.). United States of America. UNWTO. (2011). UNWTO Annual Report. Madrid, Spain. UNWTO. (2014). UNWTO Tourism Highlights. Madrid, Spain. Retrieved from www.unwto.org UNWTO. (2015). Over 1.1 billion tourists travelled abroad in 2014. Retrieved January 14, 2016, from http://media.unwto.org/press-release/2015-01-27 UPEN. (2009). Kedah Maju 2010. Kedah, Malaysia. Waligo, V. M., Clarke, J., & Hawkins, R. (2013). Implementing sustainable tourism: A multi-stakeholder involvement management framework. Tourism Management, 36, 342–353. Walker, K. (2008). Tools to enhance community capacity to critically evaluate tourism activities. In G. Moscardo (Ed.), Building Community Capacity for Tourism Development (pp. 86–100). United Kingdom: CABI International. Wang, Y. A., & Pfister, R. E. (2008). Residents’ attitudes toward tourism and perceived personal benefits in a rural community. Journal of Travel Research, 47(1), 84–93. WCED. (1987). Report on the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Weaver, D. (2006). Issues in Sustainable Tourism. In Sustainable Tourism: Theory and Practice (pp. 19–37). Amsterdam: Elsevier Ltd. West, D., & Thomas, L. (2005). Looking for the “bigger picture”: An application of the appreciative inquiry method in Renfrewshire Council for voluntary services. International Journal of Information Management, 25, 429–441. Whitney, D., & Trosten-Bloom, A. (2010). The power of Appreciative Inquiry: A practical guide to positive change. (D. Cooperrider, Ed.) (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publisher, Inc. Wilson, S., Fesenmaier, D. R., Fesenmaier, J., & Es, J. C. Van. (2001). Factors for success in rural tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 40(2), 132– 138. WTO. (2001). Rural Tourism Master Plan for Malaysia. Malaysia. WTO. (2002a). Rural Tourism in Europe: Experiences and Perspectives. In WTO SEMINAR (pp. 1–10). Belgrade, Yugoslavia. 270
WTO. (2002b). WTO seminar “ Rural Tourism in Europe: Experiences and Perspectives.” Tourism. Belgrade, Yugoslavia. WTTC. (2012a). Benchmarking Travel & Tourism Global summary. United Kingdom. WTTC. (2012b). Travel & Tourism Economic Impact - Malaysia. United Kingdom. WTTC. (2012c). Travel & Tourism Economic Impact - World. United Kingdom. WTTC. (2013). Travel & Tourism Economic Impact - World. United Kingdom. WTTC. (2014a). Travel & Tourism Economic Impact- Malaysia. Malaysia. WTTC. (2014b). Travel & Tourism in Malaysia to grow 6.8% during 2014. Gaya Travel Magazine, pp. 1–9. Malaysia. WTTC. (2015). Travel & Tourism Economic Impact Malaysia. Malaysia. WWF. (2012). World Wild Fund for Nature- Malaysia. Retrieved September 21, 2012, from http://www.wwf.org.my/about_wwf/who_we_are/ Xu, F., & Fox, D. (2014). Modelling 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 tourism development theory with structural equation modeling. Tourism Management, 22, 363–372. You, Z., Chen, W., & Song, L. (2011). Evaluating ecological tourism under sustainable development in Karst Area. Journal of Sustainable Development, 4(2), 234–239. Yutyunyong, T., & Scott, N. (2009). The integration of social exchange theory and social representations theory: A new perspective on residents’ perception research. In 18th Tourism and Hospitality Education And Research Conference (pp. 1–23). Australia: Curtin University of Technology. Zampetakis, L. A., & Kanelakis, G. (2010). Opportunity entrepreneurship in the rural sector: Evidence from Greece. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 12(2), 122–142. Zhang, X. (2012). Research on the development strategies of rural tourism in Suzhou Based on SWOT Analysis. Energy Procedia, 16, 1295–1299. Zhang, X., Cai, L., & Harrill, R. (2009). Rural Tourism Research in China: 1997-2006. Tourism Analysis, 14, 1–8. Zhao, W., Ritchie, J. R. B., & Echtner, C. M. (2011). Social capital and tourism entrepreneurship. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1570–1593. Zhou, L. (2014). Online rural destination images: Tourism and rurality. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 3(4), 227–240. Zhu, P. (2009). Studies on sustainable development of ecological sports tourism resources and its industry. Journal of Sustainable Development, 2(2), 29–31.
271
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: RESEARCH SUPPORT Appendix A1: Research Milestone Appendix A2: Flow Chart of Research Activities Appendix A3: Approval of the Proposal Appendix A4: Letters of support APPENDIX B: THE INSTRUMENTS Appendix B1: Informed Consent Form Appendix B2: AI Focus Group Discussion (FGD) Appendix B3: AI Semi-Structured Interview with Local Authorities Appendix B4: AI Semi-structured Interview with Tourism Operators Appendix B5: AI Semi-structure interview -Visitors APPENDIX C: RESULTS/ FINDINGS Appendix C1: List of Participants Appendix C2: Outputs from Discovery Phase in ATLAS.ti Programme Appendix C2.1: Strengths and Contributions of SSAF Appendix C2.2: Potentials and Opportunities of SSAF Appendix C2.3: Tourism Impacts of SSAF Development Appendix C2.4: Stakeholders’ Attitude and Support towards SSAF’s Appendix C3: Outputs from Dream Phase in ATLAS.ti Programme Appendix C3.1: Dream statement by Local Communities at SSAF Appendix C3.2: Dream statement by Local Authorities at SSAF Appendix C3.3: Dream statement by Tourism Operators at SSAF Appendix C3.4: Dream statement by Visitors at SSAF
APPENDIX D: MAP AND RESEARCH LOCATION Appendix D1: Kedah Information Appendix D2: Background of Kulim Appendix D3: SSAF’s Pictures and Illustrations
272
APPENDIX A: RESEARCH SUPPORT
273
Appendix A1: Research Milestone
MONTH
2012
2013
2014
January
Thesis Writing
February March April May
2015
Proposal Writing Class and Literature review
Data analysis –
Draft thesis for SV Committees
linking and mapping or network tools
Amendment
June Comprehensive Exam and Pre-test
July
Thesis submission
August September October November December
Class and Literature Review
Instrument development
Thesis Writing Data collection – interview with key informer Data analysis
274
Conference paper Notice of thesis submission
Appendix A2: Flow Chart of Research Activities
Literature Review
Exploratory study
Develop set of questions
Data collection
Focus Group
Interviews
Data analysis
Atlas.ti Software
Coding & Themes
Writing Report Thesis
Writing for proceding and journals
Submit Thesis
275
Appendix A3: Approval of the Proposal
276
Appendix A4: Letters of support
277
278
APPENDIX B: THE INSTRUMENTS
279
Appendix B1: Informed Consent Form
Faculty Project
Researcher Contact detail
: Economic and Management : Exploring the Development of Sustainable Rural Tourism at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest, Kedah from Tourism Stakeholders’ Perspective : Roslizawati Che Aziz : Phone: 019-9856289 Email:
[email protected]
Description: This project is a part of Universiti Putra Malaysia Doctoral Project. The aim of this research is to understand the perceptions of local authorities, visitors, tourism operators and local communities at Sedim area towards rural tourism development at Sungai Sedim Forest Amenities Forest (SSAF), Kulim, Kedah. Studying the views of rural tourism development will contribute to the future development at SSAF. This interview will take about two hour. Please feel free to stop the interview at any time, not to answer questions that you would not like or be uncomfortable with, or ask questions dealing with the research. This interview will be audio-taped. However, all of your answers will be treated confidentially and the recorded devices will be kept safely after this interview.
CONSENT The aim of this study have been clearly explained to me and I understand what is wanted from me. I know that taking part in this study is voluntary and I am aware that I can stop taking part in it at any time and may refuse to answer any questions. I understand that any information I give will be kept strictly confidential and that no names will be used to identify me with this study without my approval.
Name: Signature:
Date:
WITNESSED BY RESEARCHER OBTAINING CONSENT Name: Signature:
Date:
280
Appendix B2: Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with Local Communities
APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY GUIDE (Participants- Local communities at Sedim area)
Thank you for participating in this session. I am an interviewer for the purpose to create a greater understanding of the application of AI approach as one of the promising tool to conduct tourism research. Local communities and leaders of the village will be interviewed directly to collect the ‘best-case’ stories on which to build the future. Your input will be an important contribution to generate meaningful ideas and actions. Many times in the interviews, we ask questions about things that are not working well so that we can fix them. This time we are going to approach things from a different angle. We are going to find out about your experiences engaging in the tourism activities at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (SSAF), Kulim, Kedah. During the interview sessions, we will be exploring your experiences in few areas; i. ii. iii.
Potential and contributions of tourism industry at SSAF Engagement in tourism activities Perception about tourism industry at SSAF
I want you to listen as if you have never listened before. The following series of questions will be very thought provoking. Kindly listen carefully about each question and allow yourself time to think about your answer. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers. Before we begin, do you have any questions? Name
:................................................................................................................
Position
:.......................................
Date
:..................................................
Signature
:..................................................
Contact no
281
:.........................................
STAGE 1- GROUNDING PHASE Personal and background information 1. 2.
Personal information; name, age, employment, position, education background, marital status How long have you lived in this area/ village?
STAGE 2- DISCOVERY “WHAT IS” This stage discovers the best of ‘what is’, through conducting and documenting the appreciative interviews and identifying common themes. The questions that will be asked during a discover process as follows; 1.
First, I would like to know about the strengths and contributions of SSAF. a) b) c) d)
e) f)
2.
What do you value most about your community/ village? What are some of the best things about living here/ your village? When/ what year did you first realize that you are living in a tourism area? What made you realize this? What is it about SSAF that you value most? What is the uniqueness or main attraction of SSAF as compare to other places? What do tourists like most about your community and SSAF? What other features would you like to share with tourists about SSAF and your community? What values would you say have distinguished this SSAF as compared to other places? How has SSAF kept those values alive? What are the factors that contribute to the successful of tourism development at SSAF?
Tell me about the potentials and opportunities for developing and promoting SSAF as rural tourism destination. a) b) c)
Are you aware of the existing of Tree Top Walk at SSAF? Have you experienced it? How do you feel? What are the best ways to develop tourism activities at SSAF? What is the most important contribution of SSAF has made to your life and your community?
d)
Based on your experiences, what kinds of opportunities do tourism offers at SSAF?
e)
In your opinion, what should government (state/local authorities) improve in order to support tourism activities? Is it difficult for stakeholders to get support from the authorities (in terms of financial, technical) for their planning or business ideas?
282
f)
g)
3.
In your opinion, tell me about the impact of tourism development at SSAF. a)
b) c) d)
4.
In your opinion, why some of the stakeholders do not interested to participate in tourism activities at SSAF? What are the problems or constraints? Did you face any problems or constraints in developing and managing your businesses/ projects/events at SSAF? Did you bring this matter up to the respective body? What are their responses?
From your own experiences and observations, what are the changes brought by tourism activities at SSAF to your life and your community? How do you feel about these changes? What do you consider before investing on SSAF’s development as a tourist destination and community in Sedim’s area? Which policies, programs, tools, etc. do you think are necessary to create appropriate or relevant development at SSAF? Can tourism preserve community culture and ways of living? Can tourism increase living standard and prosperity?
Discovery and valuing about local communities’ support a)
b) c) d)
e)
How do you think you can benefit from tourism activities at SSAF? Do you think you could benefit more if you have certain resources that you do not have now? What kind of resources do you think could help you to benefit more from tourism? What did the stakeholders do to enhance the contribution of tourism industry at SSAF? Do you support tourism activities in your area? (Are you in favour of tourism in SSAF? In what way do you give your support? Please tell us more?) What do you know about your ability to voice out? (Have you ever voiced out your opinion?)
Follow-Up Questions to Gather More Detail 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Would you elaborate on that? Can you say more about that? I am beginning to get the picture. Please tell me more. What happened specifically? What were you doing? What were others doing? How did this fit together to produce something exceptional? When did that happen? Who all was involved? What role did you play? What role did others play? Where were you during that time? How did that come about? What would it feel like to have such moments on a deeper or more frequent basis
283
STAGE 3 - DREAM “CREATING WHAT MIGHT BE” “Dream tell us what to plan for” The dream stage builds upon the Discover stage by imagining the best of ‘what could be’; a situation in which the community (or working relationship with a entrepreneurs) is at its best in all of the themes identified. Participants may use maps, flow chart, or other creative forms to create a compelling image of their community in the future, or of a working relationship with entrepreneurs that is at its very best. Once they have this ‘image’ of the best what could be, they put this into words by developing ‘provocative propositions’ statements that create a bridge between the best of ‘what is’ and ‘what could be’. Good provocative propositions are powerful and energizing and provide goal framework that can shapes the design of ‘what will be’. The following questions will be given. 1. 2.
3.
4.
How to assist and enhance the stakeholders’ livelihood through the development of tourism activities at SSAF? How to build cooperation and/or relationship between tourism stakeholders at SSAF (local authorities, local communities, operators, and visitors? If SSAF were to be selected as the best eco-tourism destination and a premier community in Malaysia, what would you like to do to achieve that goal? What business opportunities would you like to recommend to a friend who is interested in starting a new business/ event/ project in SSAF?
Thank you for your kind cooperation…
284
Appendix B3: Semi-Structured Interview with Local Authorities
APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY GUIDE (Participants- Local Authorities of Kedah State)
Thank you for participating in this interview. I am an interviewer for the purpose to create a greater understanding of the application of AI approach as one of the promising tool to conduct tourism research. Local authorities of Kedah State will be interviewed directly to collect the ‘best-case’ stories on which to build the future. Your input will be an important contribution to generate meaningful ideas and actions. Many times in the interviews, we ask questions about things that are not working well so that we can fix them. This time we are going to approach things from a different angle. We are going to find out about your experiences engaging in the tourism activities at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (SSAF), Kedah. During the interview sessions, we will be exploring your experiences in few areas; iv. v. vi.
Contribution of tourism activities Impacts of tourism industry Engagement in tourism activities
I want you to listen as if you have never listened before. The following series of questions will be very thought provoking. Kindly listen carefully about each question and allow yourself time to think about your answer. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers. Before we begin, do you have any questions? Name
:................................................................................................................
Position
:.......................................
Date
:..................................................
Signature
:..................................................
Contact no
285
:.........................................
STAGE 1- GROUNDING PHASE 1. To start, I would like to learn about your personal background and beginning at your organization. 1.1 What is your position and scopes of duty? How long have you been working here? When did you first join with this organization and what attracted you to join? 1.2 What about this organization makes you especially glad to work here? When? How? What has inspired you to be engaged and what do you most hope to contribute? STAGE 2- DISCOVERY 2. Without being humble, tell me about a time when you felt excited, energized, alive, motivated and happiest about yourself and SSAF 2.1
What are your best qualities as a leader/ employee?
2.2
What is it about SSAF that you value most? What has been a high point of your involvement with SSAF? Why was it a high point?
3. Are you aware of the existing of Tree Top Walk at SSAF? (Have you experienced it? How do you feel?) 4. What do tourists like most about your community and SSAF? What other features would you like to share with tourists about SSAF and your community? 5. What values would you say have distinguished this SSAF as compared to other places? (How has SSAF kept those values alive?) 6. In your opinion, what are the key successful factors for the development of SSAF as the best ecotourism destination in Malaysia? What are the best ways to develop tourism activities at SSAF? 7. Which policies, programs, tools, etc. do you think are necessary to create appropriate or relevant development at SSAF? 8. In your opinion, why some of the stakeholders do not interested to participate in tourism activities at SSAF? (What are the problems or constraints?) 9. Did you face any problems or constraints in developing and managing your businesses/ projects/events at SSAF? (Did you bring this matter up to the respective body? What are their responses?)
286
10. From your own experiences and observations, what are the changes brought by tourism activities at SSAF to your life and your community? (How do you feel about these changes?) 11. What do you consider before investing on SSAF’s development as a tourist destination and community in Sedim’s area? What kind of resources do you think could help you to benefit more from tourism? 12. Can tourism preserve community culture and ways of living? Can tourism increase living standard and prosperity? 13. How do you think you can benefit from tourism activities at SSAF? (Do you think you could benefit more if you have certain resources that you do not have now?) 14. What did the stakeholders do to enhance the contribution of tourism industry at SSAF? Do you support tourism activities in your area? (Are you in favour of tourism in SSAF? In what way do you give your support? Please tell us more?)
***Follow-Up Questions to Gather More Detail -
Would you elaborate on that? Can you say more about that? I am beginning to get the picture. Please tell me more. What happened specifically? What were you doing? What were others doing? How did this fit together to produce something exceptional? When did that happen? Who all was involved? What role did you play? What role did others play? Where were you during that time? How did that come about? What would it feel like to have such moments on a deeper or more frequent basis
287
STAGE 3- DREAM
The “Dream” stage focuses on what could be; people challenge the status quo by imagining a better, more vibrant, more “life-giving” future. It is both idealistic in that it creates an image of an “ideal”, future, and at the same time it is realistic because it grounded in the best of what has already actually occurred in the organization. 1. 2.
3.
4.
How to assist and enhance the stakeholders’ livelihood through the development of tourism activities at SSAF? How to build cooperation and/or relationship between tourism stakeholders at SSAF (local authorities, local communities, operators, and visitors? If SSAF were to be selected as the best eco-tourism destination and a premier community in Malaysia, what would you like to do to achieve that goal? What business opportunities would you like to recommend to a friend who is interested in starting a new business/ event/ project in SSAF?
Thank you for your kind cooperation…
288
Appendix B4: Semi-structured Interview with Tourism Operators
APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY GUIDE (Respondents- Tourism Operators at SSAF)
Thank you for participating in this interview. I am an interviewer for the purpose to create a greater understanding of the application of AI approach as one of the promising tool to conduct tourism research. Tourism operators at SSAF will be interviewed directly to collect the ‘best-case’ stories on which to build the future. Your input will be an important contribution to generate meaningful ideas and actions. Many times in the interviews, we ask questions about things that aren’t working well so that we can fix them. This time we are going to approach things from a different angle. We are going to find out about your experiences engaging in the tourism activities at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (SSAF), Kedah. During the interview sessions, we will be exploring your experiences in few areas; i. ii. iii.
Contribution of tourism activities Impacts of tourism industry Perception about tourism industry
I want you to listen like you have never listened before. The following series of questions will be very thought-provoking. Kindly listen carefully about each question and allow yourself time to think about your answer. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers. Before we begin, do you have any questions? Name
:................................................................................................................
Position
:.......................................
Date
:..................................................
Signature
:..................................................
Contact no
289
:.........................................
STAGE 1- GROUNDING PHASE
To start, I would like to learn about your personal background and beginning at SSAF/ your organization. 1.
Owner’s name, Gender, Age, Ethnic group, Marital status, Level of education, Permanent resident
2.
Name of company/ business
3.
Length of business, Average business income (monthly)
4.
Sources of business financial support
5.
Background experiences
STAGE 2- DISCOVERY PHASE A.
Strengths and Opportunities of Participants and SSAF 1.
What makes you special as an entrepreneur? What are qualities or characteristics to be successful entrepreneurs in rural tourism?
2.
How did you start your business at SSAF? What was your motivation for starting the business at SSAF?
3.
What is it about SSAF that you value most? (What is the uniqueness or main attraction of SSAF as compare to other places?)
4.
What do you value most about your community/ village? (What are some of the best things about living here/ your village?)
5.
When/ what year did you first realize that you are living in a tourism area? (What made you realize this?)
6.
What do tourists like most about your community and SSAF? What other features would you like to share with tourists about SSAF and your community?
7.
What values would you say have distinguished this SSAF as compared to other places? (How has SSAF kept those values alive?)
290
8.
B.
C.
D.
In your opinion, what kinds of opportunities do tourism offers at SSAF? What are the factors that contribute to the successful of tourism development at SSAF?
Potentials for Developing and Promoting SSAF 1.
Are you aware of the existing of Tree Top Walk at SSAF? (Have you experienced it? How do you feel?)
2.
What is the most important contribution of SSAF has made to your life and your community?
3.
In your opinion, what should government (state/local authorities) improve in order to support tourism activities? Is it difficult for stakeholders to get support from the authorities (in terms of financial, technical) for their planning or business ideas?
4.
In your opinion, why some of the stakeholders do not interested to participate in tourism activities at SSAF? (What are the problems or constraints?)
5.
Did you face any problems or constraints in developing and managing your businesses/ projects/events at SSAF? (Did you bring this matter up to the respective body? What are their responses?)
Impact of Tourism Development at SSAF 1.
From your own experiences and observations, what are the changes brought by tourism activities at SSAF to your life and your community? (How do you feel about these changes?)
2.
What do you consider before investing on SSAF’s development as a tourist destination and community in Sedim’s area?
3.
Which policies, programs, tools, etc. do you think are necessary to create appropriate or relevant development at SSAF?
4.
Can tourism preserve community culture and ways of living? Can tourism increase living standard and prosperity?
Stakeholders’ Support on Tourism Development at SSAF 1.
What kind of resources do you think could help you to benefit more from tourism? What did the stakeholders do to enhance the contribution of tourism industry at SSAF? 291
2.
3.
4.
How do you think you can benefit from tourism activities at SSAF? (Do you think you could benefit more if you have certain resources that you do not have now?) Do you support tourism activities in your area? (Are you in favour of tourism in SSAF? In what way do you give your support? Please tell us more?) What do you know about your ability to voice out? (Have you ever voiced out your opinion?)
STAGE 3- DREAM PHASE The “Dream” stage focuses on what could be; people challenge the status quo by imagining a better, more vibrant, more “life-giving” future. It is both idealistic in that it creates an image of an “ideal”, future, and at the same time it is realistic because it grounded in the best of what has already actually occurred in the organization.
1. 2.
3.
4.
How to assist and enhance the stakeholders’ livelihood through the development of tourism activities at SSAF? How to build cooperation and/or relationship between tourism stakeholders at SSAF (local authorities, local communities, operators, and visitors? If SSAF were to be selected as the best eco-tourism destination and a premier community in Malaysia, what would you like to do to achieve that goal? What business opportunities would you like to recommend to a friend who is interested in starting a new business/ event/ project in SSAF?
Thank you for your kind cooperation…
292
Appendix B5: Semi-structure interview -Visitors
Faculty of Economic and Management Universiti Putra Malaysia
APPRECIATIVE INQUIRY GUIDE (Participants- Visitors at SSAF)
Thank you for participating in this interview. I am an interviewer for the purpose to create a greater understanding of the application of AI approach as one of the promising tool to conduct tourism research. Visitors at SSAF will be interviewed directly to collect the ‘best-case’ stories on which to build the future. Your input will be an important contribution to generate meaningful ideas and actions. Many times in the interviews, we ask questions about things that are not working well so that we can fix them. This time we are going to approach things from a different angle. We are going to find out about your experiences engaging in the tourism activities at Sungai Sedim Amenity Forest (SSAF), Kedah. During the interview sessions, we will be exploring your experiences in few areas; i. ii.
Perception about tourism activities at SSAF Impacts of tourism industry
I want you to listen as if you have never listened before. The following series of questions will be very thought provoking. Kindly listen carefully about each question and allow yourself time to think about your answer. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers. Before we begin, do you have any questions? Name
:................................................................................................................
Position
:.......................................
Date
:..................................................
Contact no
293
:.........................................
STAGE 1- GROUNDING PHASE
To start this session, I would like to know about your personal background. 1. Demographic information (Gender, age, ethnic group, nationality, permanent residents, marital status, employment status, level of education) 2. Travel characteristic: 2.1 Numbers of trip to SSAF 2.2 Favourite activities and preferred accommodation 2.3 Average number of days visited SSAF 2.4 Travel party/ accompany 2.5 Source of information about SSAF 2.6 Travel arrangement to SSAF STAGE 2- DISCOVERY PHASE A.
B.
Strengths and Opportunities of Participants and SSAF 1.
What do you value most about SSAF’s community/ village? (What are some of the best things about visiting SSAF?)
2.
What is it about SSAF that you value most? (What is the uniqueness or main attraction of SSAF as compare to other places?)
3.
What other features would you like to share with your friends about SSAF and community here? What values would you say have distinguished this SSAF as compared to other places? (How has SSAF kept those values alive?)
4.
When/ what year did you first realize that SSAF as a tourism area? (What made you realize this?)
5.
In your opinion, what kinds of opportunities do tourism offers at SSAF? What are the factors that contribute to the successful of tourism development at SSAF?
Potentials for Developing and Promoting SSAF 1.
Are you aware of the existing of Tree Top Walk at SSAF? (Have you experienced it? How do you feel?)
2.
What are the best ways to develop tourism activities at SSAF? In your opinion, what should government (state/local authorities) improve in order to support tourism activities? 294
C.
D.
3.
Did you face any problems or constraints in managing your businesses/ projects/events at SSAF? (Did you bring this matter up to the respective body? What are their responses?)
4.
When you are/were considering a holiday at SSAF, what is your main reason for visiting SSAF? (Your travel motivations)
5.
How important do you consider the following attributes and the services available during your holiday at SSAF, in order to make a successful holiday? Accessibility and transportation Services offered (Accommodation, food and beverage) Public Facilities and Infrastructures Travel Arrangements Recreations activities/ product available
Impact of Tourism Development at SSAF 1.
From your own observations, what are the changes brought by tourism activities at SSAF to your life and community? (How do you feel about these changes?)
2.
In your opinion, what do you consider before investing on SSAF’s development as a tourism destination?
3.
Which policies, programs, tools, etc. do you think are necessary to create appropriate or relevant development at SSAF?
4.
Can tourism preserve community culture and ways of living? Can tourism increase living standard and prosperity?
Stakeholders’ Support on Tourism Development at SSAF 1.
What kind of resources do you think could help you to benefit more from tourism? How do you think you can benefit from tourism activities at SSAF? (Do you think you could benefit more if you have certain resources that you do not have now?)
2.
Do you support tourism activities in your area? (Are you in favour of tourism in SSAF? In what way do you give your support? Please tell us more?)
295
STAGE 3- DREAM PHASE The “Dream” stage focuses on what could be; people challenge the status quo by imagining a better, more vibrant, more “life-giving” future. It is both idealistic in that it creates an image of an “ideal”, future, and at the same time it is realistic because it grounded in the best of what has already actually occurred in the organization. 1.
2.
3.
How to build cooperation and/or relationship between tourism stakeholders at SSAF (local authorities, local communities, operators, and visitors? If SSAF were to be selected as the best eco-tourism destination and a premier community in Malaysia, what would you like to do to achieve that goal? What business opportunities would you like to recommend to a friend who is interested in starting a new business/ event/ project in SSAF?
Thank you for your kind cooperation…
296
APPENDIX C: RESULTS/ FINDINGS
297
Appendix C1: Detail Information of Participants (N=59)
Respondent
Gender
Age
Occupation
LC 1 LC 2 LC 3 LC 4 LC 5
M M M M M
43 47 53 38 45
Head of Village Farmer Farmer Farmer Farmer
LC 6
M
56
Farmer
LC 7 LC 8 LC 9 LC 10 LC 11
F F F F M
48 48 39 50 52
Teacher Business Guide Housewife Businessman
LC 12
M
56
Farmer
LC 13 LC 14 LC 15 LC 16
M M M M
44 43 57 48
Farmer Farmer Farmer Farmer
YG 1
M
32
YG 2 YG 3 YG 4 YG 5
M M M M
24 24 23 28
YG 6 YG 7 YG 8 YG 9 YG 10 YG 11 YG 12
M M M M M M M
22 23 24 25 24 26 26
YG 13 YG 14 YG 15 YG 16 YG 17 YG 18
M M M M M M
19 21 19 23 25 23
Guide/ Instructor Farmer Operator Farmer Guide/ Instructor Operator Student College Operator Businessman Farmer Farmer Guide/ Instructor Operator Operator Operator Guide Farmer Operator 298
Education
Details
Degree Primary school Primary school Primary school Secondary school Secondary school Degree SPM SPM SPM Secondary school Secondary school Primary school Primary school Primary school Primary school
Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian
SPM
Malaysian
SPM SPM SPM SPM
Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian
SPM Certificate SPM SPM SPM SPM SPM
Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian
SPM SPM SPM SPM SPM SPM
Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian
Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian
YG 19
M
24
Operator
SPM
Malaysian
LA 1
M
45
Master Degree
LA 2
F
35
LA 3
M
46
Tourism Malaysia Forestry Department UPEN
State Director Assistant Director Director
LA 4
M
32
UPEN
Degree
LA 5
M
42
MPK
Degree
TO 1
F
27
TO 2
M
42
Diploma in Fresh Fashion Design Graduate Degree Tourism background
TO 3
M
50
TO 4
M
42
TO 5
M
58
TO 6
M
48
TO 7
M
36
Desa Teruna Enterprise Sedim Rainforest Resort Rapid Fire Enterprise Sedim Vista Resort De Teruna Enterprise Bintang Sedim Vista Sedim Eco Park Resort
VS 1 VS 2
M M
45 43
Teacher Engineer
Degree Master Degree
Teaching China
VS 3
M
33
Degree
China
VS 4
M
29
Degree
China
VS 5 VS 6 VS 7 VS 8 VS 9 VS 10 VS 11 VS 12
M F M F F M F M
21 24 23 39 37 19 26 22
Assistant Engineer Assistant Engineer Business Student Student Teacher Student Student Student Student
STPM SPM Degree Degree Degree STPM STPM Degree
Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian Malaysian
299
Degree Master Degree
Primary school Diploma Engineering Master Degree Primary school Diploma
Assistant Director Head of Department
Own Business Own Business Retired Army Retirement Tourism background
Appendix C2: Outputs from Discovery Phase in ATLAS.ti Programme
300
Appendix C2.1: Strengths and Contributions of SSAF
1.
Local Communities
301
2. Local Authorities
302
3. Tourism Operators
303
4. Visitors
304
Appendix C2.2: Potentials and Opportunities of SSAF
1.
Local Communities
305
2.
Local Authorities
306
3.
Tourism Operators
307
4.
Visitors
308
Appendix C2.3: Tourism Impacts of SSAF Development
1.
Local Communities
309
2.
Local Authorities
310
3.
Tourism Operators
311
4.
Visitors
312
Appendix C2.4: Stakeholders’ Attitude and Support towards SSAF’s
1.
Local Communities a) Attitude and action
313
b) Capacity building
314
c) Participation
315
2.
Local Authorities a) Attitude and action
316
b) Capacity building
317
c) Participation
318
3.
Tourism Operators a) Attitude and action
319
b) Capacity building
320
c) Participation
321
4.
Visitors
322
Appendix C3: Outputs from Dream Phase in ATLAS.ti Programme
323
Appendix C3.1: Dream statement by Local Communities at SSAF
324
Appendix C3.2: Dream statement by Local Authorities at SSAF
325
Appendix C3.3: Dream statement by Tourism Operators at SSAF
326
Appendix C3.4: Dream statement by Visitors at SSAF
327
APPENDIX D: DATA COLLECTION PROCESSES
328
Appendix D1: Focus Group Discussions
329
Appendix D2: Semi-structured Interviews
330
331
APPENDIX E: MAP AND RESEARCH LOCATION
332
Appendix E1: Kedah Information
333
Map of Kedah State
334
Appendix E2: Background of Kulim District
335
336
Appendix E3: SSAF’s Pictures and Illustrations
337
Some of the activities at SSAF
338
BIODATA OF STUDENT
Roslizawati comes from Triang, Pahang. She was born on the 9th June 1982 at Bachok, Kelantan. In 2003, she was awarded a diploma in Tourism Management from Polytechnic Johor Bahru, Johor. She acquired her degree in 2007 with BSc. in Tourism Management (Hons) from Universiti Utara Malaysia, Kedah (UUM). A year after graduation, she was offered as Tutor at Universiti Malaysia Kelantan (UMK) and this has led her to UUM again where she obtained MBA degree in Tourism and Hospitality Management in 2010. She was assigned as Lecturer in Tourism and Hospitality Department at UMK before pursuing her PhD at Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM). She is currently pursuing her Doctoral of Philosophy degree in the field of Tourism, Faculty of Economic and Management, UPM.
339
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
Aziz, R. C., Abdul, M., Aziz, Y. A., & Rahman, A. A. (2015). Appreciative inquiry approach: A promising research tool for rural tourism development (Chapter 9). In M. Kozak & N. Kozak (Eds.), Tourism Management (p. 119). Cambridge Scholar Publishing Aziz, R. C., Abdul, M., Aziz, Y. A., & Rahman, A. A. (2014). Revealing the power of appreciative inquiry approach for rural tourism research. In N. Sumarjan, M. Z. M. Salehuddin, M. R. Salleh, Z. Mohd, M. H. M. Hanafiah, M. F. S. Bakhtiar, & A. Zainal (Eds.), Hospitality and Tourism: Synergizing Creativity and Innovation in Research (p. 93). London: Taylors and Francais Group Aziz, R. C., Abdul, M., Aziz, Y. A., & Rahman, A. A. (2014). Appreciative inquiry approach: A promising research tool for rural tourism development. In M. Kozak & N. Kozak (Eds.), 7 th World Conference for Graduate Research in Tourism Hospitality and Leisure, Istanbul, Turkey (p. 598). Ankara, Turkey: Detay Anatolia AKademik Yayincilik Aziz, R. C., Abdul, M., Aziz, Y. A., & Rahman, A. A. (2013). Appreciative Inquiry: An alternative research approach for sustainable rural tourism development. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality & Culinary Arts, 5 (2), 1-18.
340
