Category: Finance, Business, Management, Economics and Accounting
ORIGINAL
Dimensions of responsible tourism and quality of life
Dimensiones del turismo responsable y la calidad de vida
R.A. Dhilipan Rajha1 
*, G. Rajini1 *
1School of Management Studies, Vels Institute of Science, Technology and Advanced Studies (VISTAS), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Cite as: Dhilipan Rajha R, Rajini G. Dimensions of responsible tourism and quality of life. Salud, Ciencia y Tecnología - Serie de Conferencias. 2024; 3:886. https://doi.org/10.56294/sctconf2024886
Submitted: 03-02-2024 Revised: 20-04-2024 Accepted: 12-06-2024 Published: 13-06-2024
Editor: Dr.
William Castillo-González
ABSTRACT
Responsible tourism consists in undertaking such activities that enable achieving growth in a way that either does not destroy the existing environment and protects the culture, history, heritage, and achievements of local communities. Besides, the attainment of responsible tourism requires careful management of tourists’ and residents’ behaviors to prevent deleterious effects on the environment, sociocultural setting and visitor satisfaction. This paper is aimed to evolve the factors influencing Dimensions of Responsible tourism and to validate Quality of Life (QOL). The study is made with selected 3 Districts in Tamilnadu respectively Madurai District, Tanjore District and Kanniyakumari District. The respondents are the residents who are located in the three districts nearing tourism spots. 250 Questionnaires were distributed to the respondents and only 225 respondents returned the full filled questionnaire. Through IBM SPSS the validity construction is ensured through the Percentage analysis, Descriptive Analysis and Confirmatory factor analysis. Reliability is measured with the consistency of each item score. These tests are guaranteed by representative samples and Convenience sampling method is used to analyse the study. Tourism can have both positive and negative impacts on the QOL of local communities. In general, the domains of QOL that are perceived to be positively affected are the economy, employment opportunities, community pride, cultural exchange, and availability of facilities.
Keywords: Tourism; Quality of Life; Community Development; Tamilnadu; Well-Being.
RESUMEN
El turismo responsable consiste en emprender actividades que permitan lograr un crecimiento de forma que no se destruya el entorno existente y se protejan la cultura, la historia, el patrimonio y los logros de las comunidades locales. Además, la consecución de un turismo responsable requiere una gestión cuidadosa de los comportamientos de turistas y residentes para evitar efectos nocivos sobre el medio ambiente, el entorno sociocultural y la satisfacción de los visitantes. El objetivo de este trabajo es desarrollar los factores que influyen en las dimensiones del turismo responsable y validar la calidad de vida. El estudio se ha realizado en tres distritos seleccionados de Tamilnadu: Madurai, Tanjore y Kanniyakumari. Se distribuyeron 250 cuestionarios a los encuestados y sólo 225 devolvieron el cuestionario cumplimentado. Mediante IBM SPSS se garantiza la construcción de la validez a través del análisis porcentual, el análisis descriptivo y el análisis factorial confirmatorio. La fiabilidad se mide con la consistencia de la puntuación de cada ítem. Estas pruebas se garantizan mediante muestras representativas y se utiliza el método de muestreo de conveniencia para analizar el estudio. El turismo puede tener repercusiones tanto positivas como negativas en la CdV de las comunidades locales. En general, los ámbitos de la CdV que se perciben afectados positivamente son la economía, las oportunidades de empleo, el orgullo comunitario, el intercambio cultural y la disponibilidad de instalaciones.
Palabras clave: Turismo; Calidad de Vida; Desarrollo Comunitario; Tamilnadu; Bienestar.
INTRODUCTION
The tourist industry has experienced significant growth as a vehicle for local economic development during the last few decades. The majority of civic leaders and experts in economic development have gradually come to view tourism as a significant sector that may boost local job prospects, tax receipts, and economic variety.(1)
In order to practise responsible tourism, one must engage in activities that promote growth while preserving the environment and safeguarding the customs, traditions, heritage, and accomplishments of the local people. Furthermore, in order to achieve responsible tourism, visitors’ and locals’ behaviours must be carefully controlled to avoid negative impacts on the environment, the sociocultural context, and visitor pleasure.
Only a small number of studies have examined the impact of the travel industry on residents’ QOL, despite the growing interest in assessing the relationship between the travel industry and QOL and the extensive knowledge that the travel industry has a great potential to improve residents’ QOL. Thus, quality of life (QOL) is the dependent variable in this study, whereas the aspects of responsible tourism functioned as an independent variable.(3)
Theoretical background
Carried out on the effects of tourism and “residents’ QOL.” Articles that were literature reviews, qualitative investigations, or in which the whole articles were not available were not included. 18 articles were chosen for evaluation out of the 673 that were found during the first search. Local communities’ quality of life is impacted by tourism. The aspects that are often seen to be favourably impacted include the strengthening of the economy, job possibilities, sense of community, cross-cultural interactions, and more accessibility to amenities. The majority of the research indicate that the following domains are adversely impacted: social connections, health, safety, cost of living, physical environment quality, and accessibility to public utilities. In addition, there is discontent with the kinds of occupations that are offered.(4)
The most widely accepted idea and guiding principle for contemporary tourist development is responsible tourism practice, or RTP. RTP works to improve the local cultures and the environment while also advancing a higher standard of living (QOL). This essay aims to ascertain how RTP is seen by the Langkawi Island inhabitants and how it affects their standard of living. Using quota sampling, self-administered questionnaires were given to the people of the Langkawi Islands. Using RTP as the moderating variable, Baron and Kenny’s four-step analysis was used to assess the study conjunctures.(5) Hypothesized Model shown in figure 1.
Objectives of the Study
· To find the personal details of the respondents who are the residents in the selected tourism places.
· To evolve the factors influencing Dimensions of Responsible tourism and Quality of life.
· To validate the significance between Dimensions of Responsible tourism and Quality of life.(6,7)
Hypotheses Development
Impact of Economic dimension on Emotional well-being
Ha1: There is a positive impact on Economic Dimension on Emotional well-being.
Impact of Environmental decision on Emotional well being
Ha2: There is a positive impact on Environmental decision on Emotional wellbeing.
Impact of Political dimension on Emotional well being
Ha3: There is a positive impact on Political dimension on Emotional well-being.
Impact of Social dimension on Emotional well being
Ha4: There is a positive impact on Social dimension on Emotional well-being.
Impact of Technical dimension on Emotional well being
Ha5: There is a positive impact on Technical dimension on Emotional well-being.
Impact of Political dimension on Health and safety well-being
Ha6: There is a positive impact on Political dimension on Health and safety well-being.
Impact of Economic dimension on Health and safety well-being
Ha7: There is a positive impact on Economic dimension on Health and safety well-beig.
Impact of Environmental decision on Health and safety well-being
Ha8: There is a positive impact on Environmental decision on Health and safety well-being.
Impact of Social dimension on Health and safety well-being
Ha9: There is a positive impact on Social dimension on Health and safety well-being.
Impact of Technical dimension on Health and safety well-being
Ha10: There is a positive impact on Technical dimension on Health and safety well-being.
Hypothesized Model
Figure 1. Hypothesized Model
METHOD
Recently, a number of research have developed scales to assess methods, attitudes, and other scientific applications. The act of building a measuring scale provides researchers with the ability to learn about concepts, people, and other processes. The creation of a scale becomes a crucial instrument for quantifying things that were before unmeasurable. The phenomena are objects produced by theoretical factors that are not directly observable. The research was conducted using three districts from Tamilnadu, namely Madurai, Tanjore, and Kanniyakumari districts. The responders are the locals living in the three areas that are close to popular tourist destinations. Only 225 of the 250 respondents who received questionnaires returned them completely filled out. By using percentage analysis, descriptive analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis in IBM SPSS, validity construction is guaranteed. Each item’s score is consistently used to gauge reliability. Representative samples ensure the validity of these tests, and the convenience sampling approach is employed in the study’s analysis.(9)
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Percentage Analysis
|
Table 1. Percentage Analysis |
||
|
|
No. of. Respondents |
Total Percentage |
|
Gender |
|
|
|
Male |
125 |
55,5 |
|
Female |
100 |
44,5 |
|
Total |
225 |
100,0 |
|
Age |
|
|
|
Up to 30 |
78 |
34,6 |
|
31 – 40 |
44 |
19,5 |
|
41 -50 |
63 |
28 |
|
Above 50 |
40 |
17,9 |
|
Total |
225 |
100,0 |
|
Education |
|
|
|
Up to high school |
24 |
10,6 |
|
ITI |
59 |
26,2 |
|
Diploma |
18 |
8 |
|
UG |
70 |
31,2 |
|
PG |
54 |
24 |
|
Total |
225 |
100,0 |
|
Monthly salary |
|
|
|
Below 15,000 |
37 |
16,4 |
|
15,001 – 25,000 |
76 |
33,7 |
|
25,001 – 35,000 |
69 |
30,6 |
|
35,000 above |
43 |
19,3 |
|
Total |
225 |
100,0 |
|
Marital status |
|
|
|
Single |
80 |
35,5 |
|
Married |
145 |
64,5 |
|
Total |
225 |
100,0 |
|
Job profile |
|
|
|
Govt |
47 |
20,8 |
|
Private |
89 |
39,5 |
|
Self employed |
41 |
18,2 |
|
Agriculturist |
48 |
21,5 |
|
Total |
225 |
100 |
From the above table 1, it is clearly understood that majority of the respondents 55,5 % percentage of the respondents are male and 44,5 % are Female. Also, we can understand that majority of the respondents are belong to the age group of up to 30 with 34,6 %, 19,5 % of respondents are belong to 31 – 40 age group, 28 % and 17,9 % of respondents are belongs to 41 – 50 and above 50 age groups respectively. From the table, we can understand 10,6 % of the respondents are up to high school, 31,2 % are undergraduate. Majority of respondents are married with 64,5 %, 20,8 % respondents are employed in govt, 39,5 % are working in private companies, 18,2 % are self-employed and 21,5 % are agriculturist. Majority of respondents, earning 15,001 – 25,000 per month with 33,7 %, 30,67 % of respondents are earning 25,001 – 35,000. 16,4 % of respondents are earning below 15,000, rest are earning 35,000 above with 19,3 %.
Measurement Properties, Discriminant Validity and Reliability
|
Table 2. Measurement Properties, Discriminant Validity and Reliability |
|||||||||
|
Variables |
Mean |
S. D |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
|
Economic dimension |
3,8233 |
,93576 |
0,872 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental decision(8) |
3,8569 |
,95683 |
0,242** |
0,868 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Social dimension |
3,8931 |
,95061 |
0,034 |
0,152* |
0,856 |
|
|
|
|
|
Political dimension |
3,7044 |
,95144 |
0,166* |
0,115 |
0,550*** |
0,854 |
|
|
|
|
Technical dimension |
2,1426 |
1,04821 |
0,173* |
0,811*** |
0,175* |
0,110 |
0,922 |
|
|
|
Emotional well being |
3,7667 |
,87664 |
-0,141† |
-0,060 |
-0,022 |
-0,057 |
-0,008 |
0,829 |
|
|
Health and safety well-being |
3,7933 |
,88763 |
0,022 |
0,020 |
0,031 |
-0,014 |
0,026 |
0,017 |
0,863 |
We used structural equation modeling (Lisrel package) to verify the measurement model. Table 2 shows the measurement properties of the survey instrument.(2) The factor loadings for most of the indicators were over 0,7, except for 7 of the indicators they ranged between 0,8 and 0,95. suggests that the value at the threshold of 0,0 or above is acceptable. Since we used established measures, we retained these 8 indicators though they are less than 0,95, but over 0,8.
Construct Reliability and Validity
|
Table 3. Construct Reliability and Validity |
||||
|
Variable |
Cronbach’s Alpha |
rho_A |
Composite Reliability |
Average Variance Extracted (AVE) |
|
Economic dimension |
,777 |
0,959 |
0,940 |
0,760 |
|
Environmental decision |
,780 |
1,168 |
0,938 |
0,754 |
|
Social dimension |
,832 |
0,938 |
0,932 |
0,733 |
|
Political dimension |
,797 |
0,936 |
0,931 |
0,729 |
|
Technical dimension |
,890 |
0,975 |
0,957 |
0,849 |
|
Emotional well being |
,836 |
0,945 |
0,897 |
0,688 |
|
Health and safety well-being |
,853 |
0,920 |
0,897 |
0,745 |
From the above table 2, we can see all the 7 variable has valid values respectfully. All the Cronbach’s alpha value gives significant results, the composite values are lies between 0,85 to 0,95. The variable Technical dimension has the high average variance which is 0,849 respectfully. The highest Cronbach’s alpha is recorded as 0,890 in Technical dimension. Construct Reliability and Validity in shown in table 3.
Structural Equation Model
Figure 2. Structural Equation Model
|
Table 4. Regression Weights |
|||||
|
|
|
|
Hypotheses |
P value |
Results |
|
Health and safety well-being |
<--- |
Political dimension |
H1 |
0,004 |
Supported |
|
Health and safety well-being |
<--- |
Economic dimension |
H2 |
0,037 |
Supported |
|
Health and safety well-being |
<--- |
Environmental decision |
H3 |
0,194 |
Not Supported |
|
Health and safety well-being |
<--- |
Social dimension |
H4 |
0,008 |
Supported |
|
Health and safety well-being |
<--- |
Technical dimension |
H5 |
0,048 |
Supported |
|
Emotional well being |
<--- |
Political dimension |
H6 |
0,069 |
Not Supported |
|
Emotional well being |
<--- |
Economic dimension |
H7 |
0,893 |
Not Supported |
|
Emotional well being |
<--- |
Environmental decision |
H8 |
0,034 |
Supported |
|
Emotional well being |
<--- |
Social dimension |
H9 |
0,677 |
Not Supported |
|
Emotional well being |
<--- |
Technical dimension |
H10 |
0,040 |
Supported |
From the above table 4 After checking the measurement properties, discriminant and convergent validity, and reliability, we tested the hypotheses. The effect of Political dimension, Economic dimension, social dimension, Technical dimension on Health and safety well-being was supported (p = 0,004, 0,037, 0,008, 0,048 - p <,050) H1, H2, H4, H5. The path coefficient of the relationship between Emotional well-being and Environmental decision, Technical dimension was supported (p = 0,034, 0,04, p <,005), H8 and H9. Structural Equation Model in shown in figure 2.
CONCLUSION
The quality of life of nearby communities can be impacted by tourism in both good and bad ways. In general, people believe that the economy, employment prospects, sense of community, cross-cultural interaction, and facility accessibility have a favourable impact on QOL. The majority of research indicate that the following domains are adversely impacted: social connections, health, safety, expense of living, physical environment quality, and accessibility to public utilities. It is important to make an effort to reduce adverse effects in order to boost community support for tourist growth.(10)
REFERENCES
1. Chang CL, McAleer M, Ramos V. A charter for sustainable tourism after COVID-19. Sustainability. 2020 May 1; 12(9): 3671. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093671.
2. Chin WW, Peterson RA, Brown SP. Structural equation modeling in marketing: Some practical reminders. Journal of marketing theory and practice. 2008 Sep 1; 16(4): 287-298.
3. Cottrell SP, Cutumisu N. Sustainable tourism development strategy in WWF Pan Parks: Case of a Swedish and Romanian national park. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism. 2006 Aug 1; 6(2): 150-167.
4. Cottrell SP, Vaske JJ, Roemer JM. Resident satisfaction with sustainable tourism: The case of Frankenwald Nature Park, Germany. Tourism Management Perspectives. 2013 Oct 1; 8: 42-48.
5. Donyadide A. Ethics in tourism. European Journal of Social Sciences. 2010; 17(3): 426-433.
6. Farmaki A, Constanti P, Yiasemi I, Karis P. Responsible tourism in Cyprus: the rhetoric and the reality. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes. 2014 Feb 4; 6(1): 10-26.
7. Gao L, Bai X. A unified perspective on the factors influencing consumer acceptance of internet of things technology. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics. 2014 Apr 8; 26(2): 211-231.
8. Kusumawati A, Utomo HS, Suharyono S, Sunarti S. Effects of sustainability on WoM intention and revisit intention, with environmental awareness as a moderator. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal. 2019 Sep 30; 31(1): 273-288.
9. Maichum K, Parichatnon S, Peng KC. Application of the extended theory of planned behavior model to investigate purchase intention of green products among Thai consumers. Sustainability. 2016 Oct 23; 8(10): 1077. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8101077.
10. Wu X, Lai IK. The acceptance of augmented reality tour app for promoting film-induced tourism: the effect of celebrity involvement and personal innovativeness. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology. 2021 Aug 5; 12(3): 454-470.
FINANCING
None.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.
AUTHORSHIP CONTRIBUTION
Conceptualization: R.A. Dhilipan Rajha, G. Rajini.
Research: R.A. Dhilipan Rajha, G. Rajini.
Writing - original draft: R.A. Dhilipan Rajha, G. Rajini.
Writing - revision and editing: R.A. Dhilipan Rajha, G. Rajini.